[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Walter Isaacson, Part 1
Clinton: SCOTUS Myriad Genetics Decision 'Terrific'
Can You Patent Human Genes? ACLU Says No
Yours, Mine and Ours (not yet!): An Update on the Patentability of Human Genes
When a person who has received an organ transplant experiences rejection, DNA from the transplanted organ is released into the bloodstream as the organ's cells are attacked by the person's immune system. The circulating DNA...more
BACKGROUND - This month, a Delaware federal jury determined that Illumina, Inc. (Illumina) willfully infringed two DNA sequencing patents owned by Complete Genomics, Inc. (CGI), while also invalidating three Illumina patents...more
Illumina has now filed its brief in opposition, completing the certiorari petitions/responses for all parties in the concurrent American Axle and Ariosa patent eligibility cases. True to form, neither of the filings in...more
The District Court for the Northern District of Ohio dismissed Cybergenetics Corp.’s infringement suit after determining that the asserted claims—which recite mathematical algorithms for analyzing data taken from a DNA...more
Claims Covering Human Engineering That Exploit a Naturally-Occurring Phenomenon Are Patent Eligible - In Illumina, Inc. V. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., Appeal No. 19-1419, the Federal Circuit modified its earlier decision...more
By Kevin E. Noonan -- For several years, Sigma Aldrich has been prosecuting several applications (including USSNs 15/188,911; 15/188,924; and 15/456,204) claiming CRISPR technology that (it alleged) would be deserving of an...more
On April 20th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) set oral argument in Interference No. 106,155, between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively,...more
On March 23rd Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") filed its Reply to Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University...more
ILLUMINA, INC. v. ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS, INC. Before Lourie, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the Northern District of California. Summary: Use of a natural phenomenon in a method of preparation claim found patent eligible...more
The Federal Circuit, in Illumina, Inc., v. Ariosia, reversed the summary judgment decision of a lower trial court and upheld—as patent subject matter eligible—claims in two patents (U.S. 9,580,751; U.S. 9,738,931). The...more
Ajinomoto Co., Inc. vs. CH Cheiljedang Corp. (2018-1590, 2018-1629) - In a pair of cross-appeals from the International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s ruling that one of CJ CheilJedang...more
The supply from the United States of a single component of an invention, for assembly of the invention abroad, is not patent infringement under Section 271(f)(1) of the Patent Act. This is according to a unanimous ruling this...more
The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Life Techs. Corp. v. Promega Corp., 14-1538, to resolve: “[w]hether a supplier can be held liable for providing ‘all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented...more
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
Last week, Appellee Natera, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August (see "Sequenom Requests Rehearing En...more
On Monday, Appellee Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August. In its response, Ariosa...more
In Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. v. Sequenom Inc., 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015), a Federal Circuit panel held that Sequenom Inc.’s prenatal diagnosis patent claims patent ineligible subject matter under the two-step test of Mayo...more
One of the first IPR petitions ever filed, IPR2012-0006, was related to biotechnology -- specifically DNA sequencing. Illumina, Inc. filed that petition, and two others, IPR2012-00007 and IPR2013-00011, against patents owned...more
Under the Patent Act, one can patent “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof.” Common exceptions to what can be patented include laws of nature,...more
Disaster survivors, and even people who just hear about a disaster, are often first overwhelmed by it; they can only rationally process its significance after some time. During that time they overcome the initial visceral...more
Enablement is the requirement that a patent teach a person skilled in the art (the field of the invention) how to make and use the invention without undue experimentation. In other words, a patent must describe the invention...more
Addressing the requirements of infringement based on extraterritorial combinations of components, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling of no infringement, finding that for a patent...more
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision in AMP v. Myriad Genetics in 2013, Myriad (paradoxically to those either not paying attention or who over interpreted the scope of the Court's holding in its opinion) filed...more
The Federal Circuit heard oral argument in the Ariosa v. Sequenom case last Friday, and a discussion of that argument will be posted in due course. Having posted on Sequenom's opening brief and the amicus brief filed by BIO,...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