Last week, Carlson Caspers’ attorneys Caroline Marsili presented a CLE at the 2018 Midwest IP Institute addressing (1) subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, (2) biosimilar applicants’ use of IPR proceedings and their standing to appeal PTAB decisions, and (3) the CRISPR patent battles. Slides from this presentation summarizing the state of the…
A divided Federal Circuit panel upheld Vanda’s patent covering its iloperidone schizophrenia treatment (Fanapt®), holding the method of treatment claims were directed to patent-eligible subject matter. Vanda Pharms. Inc., et al. v. West-Ward Pharms. Int’l Ltd., et al., Nos. 2016-2707, 2016-2708 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 13, 2018). In meticulously evading the Supreme Court’s Mayo decision, Vanda…
In Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the Supreme Court held invalid under § 101 patent claims that were directed to isolated genes that could be used to test for increased risk of breast cancer. While the Court found that discovery of the genes was important and useful, “separating [the] gene from its surrounding…
Last Wednesday we commented on a Delaware decision (Andrews, J.) applying the Federal Circuit’s Mayo analysis to find that a patent on a new dosing regimen for an old drug lacked patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Alice in Pharma Land. Two days later, the Federal Circuit affirmed another Delaware decision (Stark, J.)…
Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 134 S.Ct. 2347 (2014), courts have churned out countless decisions holding patents invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming unpatentable subject matter. Most of these patents have involved the application of well-known business methods by means of a computer. In those cases,…