January 9th was a busy day at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). On that day no fewer than five substantive briefs were filed in Interference No. 106,115, two by Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University,...more
Last January 17th, the Opposition Division (OD) of the European Patent Office revoked in its entirety European Patent No. EP 2771468, which named as Proprietors The Broad Institute, MIT, and Harvard College and had been...more
All interferences have filings that are either kept confidential or are entirely procedural in nature. While there is little substantive to discuss, acknowledging them serves the purpose of keeping track of the proceedings;...more
As previously discussed, Senior Party The Broad Institute (joined by Harvard University and MIT) on October 14th filed Substantive Motion No 2 (to substitute the count) in the current interference over CRISPR technology (No....more
On October 14th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier; collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Motion No. 1 to be awarded priority benefit to their...more
Part of every interference are a variety of housekeeping matters which, while not dispositive, are important to recognize for their effects (or potential effects) on the proceedings. Some are simple matters: for example, on...more
On October 14th, Senior Party the Broad Institute (joined by Harvard University and MIT) filed several authorized motions in Interference No. 106,115, including Substantive Motion No. 2 and No. 3, against Junior Party the...more
On October 14th, Senior Party the Broad Institute (joined by Harvard University and MIT) filed several authorized motions, including Substantive Motion No. 3 (to designate claims as not corresponding to the count), against...more
October 14th was a busy day at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for the current interference over CRISPR technology (No. 106,115). The Junior Party (the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna;...more
Ever since the Supreme Court's decision in Dickerson v. Zurko, decisions from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (whether in ex parte examination or any of the many varieties of actions before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
Any party who has ever come before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) quickly realizes the extent to which the Board enforces procedural niceties. This tendency sometimes leads to...more
Since the present reissue statute was enacted as part of the 1952 Patent Act, the Patent Office has granted almost eight million utility patents and less than twenty-five thousand reissue patents. Nevertheless, reissue...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit overturned an obviousness determination in an inter partes review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in OSI Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Apotex Inc. The Court also reaffirmed its holdings in...more
The late Gilda Radner's character, Emily Latella, would consistently misapprehend something ("violins on television," "saving Soviet jewelry"), give a guest editorial on Weekend Update, and when corrected would say "Never...more
On Monday, August 26, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued an Order deciding which of the parties' (University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, Junior Party,...more
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted U.S. Patent No. 10,385,360 to the University of California/Berkeley, directed to an aspect of its CRISPR technology (where CRISPR is an acronym for...more
The parties (University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, Junior Party, and The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University, Senior Party) to the...more
On Friday, July 19, 2019, Sigma-Aldrich filed a self-described "extraordinary" petition to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (under 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.181-1.183) and the Chief Judge of the PTAB (under 37 C.F.R....more
On June 24th, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office declared an interference (No. 106,115) between patents and applications owned by the Regents of the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle...more
On June 24th, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office declared an interference between patents (and an application) assigned to the Broad Institute (and other institutions) and applications assigned to the University of...more
Last Tuesday, April 23, 2019, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted (at long last) to the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and inventor Emmanuelle Charpentier a patent corresponding to the...more
"Pigs fly!" "Hell has frozen over!" Or less dramatically, "Supreme Court affirms Federal Circuit decision!" all would be apt subtitles for any article discussing the Supreme Court's decision today in Helsinn v. Teva. The...more
1/23/2019
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Assignment of Inventions ,
Confidentiality Agreements ,
Helsinn Healthcare SA v Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc ,
Inventions ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Public Use ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 102 ,
Third-Party Relationships
On Friday, December 7th, the Federal Circuit handed down two opinions concerning the proper application of the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP). The first, Novartis AG v. Ezra Ventures...more
Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB in Appeal of CRISPR Interference -
Barring the unlikely event that the Federal Circuit rehears en banc today's decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. (or,...more
On Monday, September 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in the University of California’s (“California”) appeal of the decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) that there is no...more