We discussed Braintree Labs v. Novel Labs in a previous post. In the panel decision, Judge Prost, with Judge Dyk joining, found the term “a patient” in Braintree’s Suprep colon cleanser patent to mean a general class of persons, i.e., a patient population. Accordingly, the panel vacated and remanded the infringement ruling relying on erroneous…
On June 18, 2014, the Patent Office issued changes to how it calculates patent term adjustments under 35 U.S.C. § 154. The new rules—drafted in response to the Federal Circuit’s decision in Novartis AG v. Lee, 740 F.3d 593 (Fed. Cir. 2014)—are now subject to public comment for the next sixty days. As we discussed…
While predicting a Supreme Court decision is never a safe bet, the oral argument in Bowman v. Monsanto suggests that the result will be welcome news for companies patenting self-replicating technology (like the biotechnology industry). On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument on Bowman v. Monsanto, which we told you about on February 12. The…