The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a notice to clarify disclosure duties owed to it entitled Duties of Disclosure and Reasonable Inquiry During Examination, Reexamination, and Reissue, and for Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Notice”). Parties have a duty of candor and good faith to the USPTO. This…
In the first Federal Circuit ruling of an appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”) decision, the Court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the PTAB”) correctly applied the broadest reasonable interpretation standard to construct patent claims, held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR, affirmed the…
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…
The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in one of the most anticipated and potentially influential biotechnology cases in decades: Ass’n for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al. In simple terms, at issue is whether human genes are patentable. The dispute began in 2009, when various non-profit research organizations and…
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments next month in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. and will consider whether to permit isolated human genes patents. Much has been written about the Myriad case, but little attention has been paid to the potential international consequences of the decision. Dissimilarities in patent rights in…
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…
A Supreme Court patent exhaustion case could affect biopharmaceuticals. Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (Docket No. 11-796), a case that may narrow patentees’ rights in self-replicating technologies. The self-replicating technology at issue in Bowman is genetically modified seeds, but it is not difficult to imagine broader implications…