In Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnositcs, Inc., (Fed. Cir. Slip Op. 2019-1419, March 17, 2020) the Federal Circuit held that process claims that exploit the discovered size differences between fetal and maternal DNA in serum...more
4/1/2020
/ Dismissals ,
Doctrine of Equivalents ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Reversal ,
USPTO
In an appeal characterized as “unusual,” the Federal Circuit affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction, holding it likely that plaintiff patent holder would succeed on the merits its claim of infringement of a patent...more
In Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., Slip Op. 14-1538 (Feb. 22, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention for manufacture abroad does not give rise to...more
3/9/2017
/ Appeals ,
Component Parts Doctrine ,
Cross-Border Transactions ,
Exports ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
IP License ,
Life Technologies Corp v Promega Corp ,
Manufacturer Liability ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
Diagnostic medicine is experiencing new challenges at the USPTO and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Under a new FDA proposal, laboratory developed test providers, previously exempt from FDA oversight, must now...more
9/24/2015
/ 510(k) RTA ,
Diagnostic Tests ,
FDA Approval ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Medical Devices ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Personalized Medicine ,
Premarket Approval Applications ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Regulatory Oversight ,
USPTO
Personalized medicine relies on diagnostic technologies to accurately evaluate a patient’s clinical or genetic signature to guide treatment decisions. Protecting innovation by patenting the diagnostic methods and tools that...more
9/21/2015
/ Algorithms ,
AMP v Myriad ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Diagnostic Method ,
Innovation Patent ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Personalized Medicine ,
SCOTUS ,
Software ,
USPTO
Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) lost a ruling that competitor NOVA Chemical Corporation and NOVA Chemicals Inc. (collectively “NOVA”) infringed claims of two Dow patents when the Federal Circuit applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s...more
9/1/2015
/ Best Practices ,
Definiteness ,
Dow Chemical ,
Indefiniteness ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
SCOTUS ,
Stare Decisis ,
Teva v Sandoz
In Akamai Techs. Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., (August 13, 2015 Fed. Cir.) an en banc Federal Circuit unanimously held that direct infringement under Section 271(a) can occur...more
8/25/2015
/ Akamai Technologies ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Diagnostic Tests ,
Direct Infringement ,
En Banc Review ,
Induced Infringement ,
Limelight v Akamai ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Myriad ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Personalized Medicine ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
On July 22, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland dismissed a long standing patent infringement suit brought by StemCells, Inc. against Neuralstem, Inc., on the ground that all those with an ownership...more
8/3/2015
/ Joint Inventors ,
Memorandum of Agreement ,
Oral Contracts ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent-in-Suit ,
Patents ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Standing ,
Stem cells ,
USPTO
In Amgen v. Sandoz, Fed. Cir., No. 15-1499 (July 21, 2015), a divided panel of the Federal Circuit issued its first decision interpreting the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), and did so in a manner that...more
7/23/2015
/ Amgen ,
Biosimilars ,
BPCIA ,
Generic Drugs ,
Marketing Exclusivity Periods ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Sandoz ,
Sandoz v Amgen
In Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., Slip Op. 2014-1139, 2014-114 (Fed. Cir. June 12, 2015), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Sequenom’s U.S. Patent No. 6,258,540 (the ‘540 Patent) was...more
The Federal Circuit in Ultramercial, Inc. v. WildTangent, Inc., held that an “entrepreneurial” multi-step process for distributing copyrighted media products over the Internet to consumers is not patent-eligible under 35...more
On Monday October 6th, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will entertain oral argument in another case involving Myriad’s BRCA1/BRCA2 diagnostic tests. In re BRCA1- and BRCA2- Based Hereditary Cancer Test...more
On January 31, 2014, Phigenix, Inc. (“Phigenix”) filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Georgia alleging that the sale and use of the drug Kadcyla by Genentech, Inc. (“Genentech”) infringed U.S. Patent No. 8,080,534B2,...more