Product of Nature Doctrine

News & Analysis as of

Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

Genband US LLC sued Metaswitch for infringement of claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,772,210 ("the '210 Patent") and U.S. Patent No 7,047,561 ("the '561 Patent") in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas...more

Top Stories of 2015: #11 to #15

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its ninth annual list of top patent stories. For 2015, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Top Patent Law Stories In 2015

I will try to keep this post as brief as possible, since I posted at length on all of the stories. There was a lot of IP action in 2015 – much involving the Fed. Cir. and Supreme Court’s resolution of cases in progress in...more

Wegner to Lee: A Four-Step Program to Resolve 101 Questions

On December 23rd, Harold (“Hal”) Wegner sent Director Lee a one-page Vision of Patent-Eligibility “Trees”, Not the “Forrest” (attached). A very brief summary of his proposed 4-step process might read: 1) Is any element of the...more

Patenting “Natural Products” Down-Under Post-Myriad

Although the Australian High Court held that claims to naturally occurring DNA (e.g., BRCA1 nucleic acid) were not patent eligible because they were not a “manner of manufacture,” since the encoded information therein was not...more

Litigation Alert: Federal Circuit’s Ariosa Decision, Good Chance for Rehearing En Banc

In June of this year, the Federal Circuit panel in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. invalidated a patent on the grounds of patent-ineligible subject matter. 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015). While the case is one of...more

Physiology/Medicine Nobels Awarded for Discoveries of “Natural Products”

In re Roslin Institute, a Fed. Cir. panel consisting of Judges Dyk, Moore and Wallach ruled that methods of isolating cffDNA were not patent eligible. Judge Dyk, writing for the panel endorsed the “markedly different”...more

Sequenom’s En Banc Petition

For any of us practitioners encountering increasing numbers of s. 101 rejection rejections of diagnostic claims based on Mayo and the March 2014 PTO Guidance – and that is pretty much any life sciences patent attorney – this...more

Eisenberg Analyzes the 101 Exception for Patents Claiming Diagnostic

PatentlyO recently posted a nearly final draft of a paper writer by Professor Rebecca Eisenberg that will be published in the Journal of Science and Technology Law (note to author – fix fn 23). (A copy can be found at the end...more

Natural Products Whiplash

What you need to know: Two important developments in the last week have exacerbated confusion around patent protection for natural products and technologies that implicate laws of nature, calling into question the...more

USPTO Issues New Subject Matter Eligibility Examination Interim Guidelines – Nature-Based Product Guidance

On December 16, 2014, the USPTO issued a comprehensive interim Guidance document for examination of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The new Guidance document supplements the June 2014 Preliminary...more

USPTO Issues New Guidance with Fewer Limitations on the Subject Matter Eligibility of Patent Claims

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today released its latest iteration of guidance—referred to as the "Interim Eligibility Guidance"—to its examiners. This guidance is aimed at assessing whether an invention claimed...more

USPTO Issues Guidance on Patentability of “Nature”-Related Patent Claims

The U.S. Supreme Court has recently taken a keen interest in whether certain subject matter is eligible to be patented under U.S. law1. In June 2013, the Supreme Court held in Myriad2 that patents on naturally-occurring DNA...more

All We Like Sheep Have Gone Astray

The CAFC extends Myriad beyond DNA claims - Much ink has recently been spilled arguing that the PTO’s new guidelines go further than they should, and that Myriad’s reasoning should not be applied to proteins, cells,...more

Update From the May 9, 2014 USPTO Patent Eligibility Guidelines Forum

On May 9, 2014, the USPTO hosted a forum to receive public feedback on the patent subject matter eligibility guidance for examiners circulated on March 4, 2014. The USPTO heard formal presentations from ten speakers...more

Reaction to Supreme Court's Decision in AMP v. Myriad

It has been just over two weeks since the Supreme Court issued its decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., holding that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent...more

The Supreme Court Nixes Claims to Isolated Genomic DNA

The U.S. Supreme Court decided today that claims to isolated genomic DNA are not patentable subject matter and thus invalid. This decision rendered invalid patent claims owned by Myriad Genetics as well as thousands of patent...more

Myriad Genetic Database Under Siege

With the U.S. Supreme Court set to consider the patent-eligibility of claims to isolated human DNA in AMP v. Myriad Genetics this morning, another aspect of Myriad’s control over BRCA testing technology is being contested. ...more

Can You Patent Human Genes? ACLU Says No [Video]

April 12 (Bloomberg Law) -- On April 15, 2013, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. The case centers on whether patents may be granted on...more

19 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:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×