News & Analysis as of

Patent Term Adjustment Terminal Disclaimer Patents

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Rethinking In re Cellect and Its Consequences

The Federal Circuit's In re Cellect decision has caused a great deal of commentary and proposals to avoid its consequences, including changing prosecution strategies and filing prospective, precautionary terminal disclaimers...more

Knobbe Martens

A Terminal Disclaimer Is Not an Escape Hatch

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE CELLECT, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Obviousness-type double patenting analyses for patents with Patent Term Adjustments are based on the...more

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

Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Dangers in the U.S.

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. introduced even more confusion in an already confusing area of the law – namely obviousness-type double patenting. Obviousness-type double patenting...more

Perkins Coie

What is Patent Term Adjustment and Why Does It Matter?

Perkins Coie on

For patents granted on applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, the enforceable patent term begins on the day the patent issues and generally expires 20 years from the earliest effective filing date of the application. ...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Watch In re Yamazaki

BakerHostetler on

[When a patent issues] with its terminal disclaimer in effect, that disclaimer [becomes part of the "original patent" for purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 251 and serves] to define its term, regardless of any further term that might...more

5 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