News & Analysis as of

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Administrative Procedure

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a... more +
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a researcher discovers a naturally occurring substance, the substance itself cannot be patented. This issue was examined in a United States Supreme Court case, AMP v. Myriad, in regard to the patentability of human genes.  less -
Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - July 2020

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Senate to Hold STRONGER Act Hearing

It would be understandable to have the impression that Congress is considering patent eligibility reform as the major (or even sole) patent-related legislation this session....more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - June 2019

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

Jones Day

Amended Claims In IPRs Must Clear Higher Hurdle Than Original Claims

Jones Day on

An IPR of issued patent claims is statutorily limited to prior art challenges based on patents and printed publications under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute an IPR of existing patent claims...more

Knobbe Martens

Patent Law Update for Medical Device Companies 2018 (Presentation)

Knobbe Martens on

Knobbe Martens Partners Paul Conover, Irfan Lateef, and Curtis Huffmire presented "Patent Law Update for Medical Device Companies 2018" at the MedTech Innovation Summit in San Francisco, CA on November 28, 2018. This session...more

Jones Day

Indefiniteness Again Leads To Unsuccessful IPR Challenge

Jones Day on

The PTAB may institute IPR proceedings only on the basis of certain prior art that is potentially invalidating under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute IPR on any other unpatentability grounds,...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Global Patent Prosecution Newsletter - September 2018: Third Party Observations in Europe, China, Japan, and for the PCT - To File...

Both the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Japanese Patent Office (JPO) accept a third party observation regarding validity of a patent application. In February 2012, it was announced that third party observations could be...more

Jones Day

After SAS, Indefinite Claims Can Be A Definite Problem For IPR Petitioners

Jones Day on

The definiteness requirement for patent claims is set forth in Section 112(b), mandating that a patent specification conclude with one or more claims “particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming subject matter which the...more

Knobbe Martens

Recent Development on Patent Eligibility of Method of Treatment Claims

Knobbe Martens on

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published a new revision to the Ninth Edition of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) (Revision 08.2017). This revision added a number of chapters...more

Jones Day

PTAB Grants Rare Motion To Amend Patent Claim After Federal Circuit Remand

Jones Day on

Last year, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s original decision denying the patent owner’s motion to amend two claims in IPR2014-00090, holding that the Board erred by “insist[ing] that the patent owner discuss whether...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In EmeraChem v Volkswagen the Circuit reverses a determination of obviousness because the ?Board did not provide the patentee with an adequate opportunity to address a prior art reference ?that formed a principal basis for...more

11 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide