Is Biotech Patentable Subject Matter?
Can You Patent Human Genes? ACLU Says No
Yours, Mine and Ours (not yet!): An Update on the Patentability of Human Genes
As we’ve noted, the Supreme Court is once again considering whether to take up patent eligibility: it recently CVSGed two more Section 101 cases. While we wait for the government’s views, the Federal Circuit will continue...more
On August 2, 2022, Sen. T. Tillis introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (S.4734) in an effort to clarify which inventions are actually patentable and to codify those that are not. Since the Supreme Court handed...more
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is at it again, gaslighting the public in its ongoing crusade against patents. While the EFF does perform some commendable work, mostly in the areas of individual privacy rights, its...more
In an ideal world, patent eligibility would be a simple, clear, and non-controversial inquiry. After all, the purpose of 35 U.S.C. § 101 is to inform the public which types of inventions are eligible for patenting and which...more
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued a study entitled “Patent eligible subject matter: Public views on the current jurisprudence in the United States.” The report was prepared in response to a...more
The Federal Circuit continued its stringent (if misguided) application of the scope of subject matter eligibility by invalidating claims asserted in CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc....more
The transcendental conundrum in patent law in these times is how to overcome the misinterpretation of the Supreme Court's decisions on patent eligibility law by district courts and the Federal Circuit. That these courts...more
ART 2: EFFORTS TO CLARIFY PATENT ELIGIBILITY UNDER § 101 - In this four-part series, we take a look forward at the cases, legislation, and other trends that are likely to have a significant impact on intellectual property...more
The cloud of uncertainty over patent eligibility of patents for medical diagnostic methods remains. On Monday, the Supreme Court declined the opportunity to revisit patent eligibility under its two-step Mayo test when it...more
This article discusses challenges in prosecuting bioinformatics patent applications before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Bioinformatics generally refers to an interdisciplinary field in which computer...more
A divided Federal Circuit, in a precedential opinion, upheld a lower court’s finding that the claims of US Patent No. 7,774,911 ineligible for patenting under Section 101 because the claims are directed to a law of nature....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, relying heavily on the specification of the asserted patent, found claims directed to an abstract idea of “wirelessly communicating status information about a system” as patent...more
From inventors and trade groups to legal scholars and judges, many have expressed frustrations with the current state of patent eligibility in the United States. In particular, the lack of clarity in assessing patent...more
Senators from both sides of the aisle expect to introduce a final bill this summer that could significantly improve the prospects for patent applicants with software and business method inventions. Congress recently held...more
The Federal Circuit’s 2018 decision in Berkheimer v. HP Inc. was likely the most consequential development in patent eligibility since the Supreme Court introduced its two-part eligibility framework in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank...more
Since 2012 the Supreme Court has made three landmark decisions banning certain types of inventions from being patented. First, Mayo v. Prometheus banned patents on methods of medical diagnosis and analysis. Then Association...more
Yesterday Democrat and Republican legislators from both the Senate and the House of Representatives released a one page outline of a proposal to change the law of patent eligibility. The legislators supporting this proposal...more
The Supreme Court earlier this decade issued several decisions concerning patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. These decisions have resulted in the invalidation of patents over concerns that the patents cover and preempt...more
For a long time, the hallmarks of patentability of an invention were basically two: is it new? is it non-obvious? If both answers were “yes,” then—provided that the patent itself was properly written—you’d get your patent. A...more
For the last several years, a major part of prosecuting software-related patents at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has been dealing with the USPTO’s inconsistent interpretation of patent subject-matter...more
Let’s set the scene: My new company develops a smart toothbrush from the ground up. It brushes your teeth, provides you with real-time information about your dental health while you brush, and even provides targeted...more
In the time since the Federal Circuit issued its Vanda Pharma decision in April, Vanda Pharm. Inc. v West-Ward Pharm. Intl. Ltd. 887 F.3d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 2018), we have had more good news for the patent eligibility of claims...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Vanda Pharm. Inc. v West-Ward Pharm. Intl. Ltd. (2016-2707, 2016-2708 April 13, 2018) provided some good news on the subject matter eligibility front for innovators and other stakeholders in...more
Post-Alice, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) is aggressively rejecting software claims under the Alice two-part test, the parameters of which many examiners are still trying to understand. Not...more
The Federal Circuit provided a welcome boost for stakeholders in the field of personalized medicine with its recent decision in Vanda Pharm. Inc. v West-Ward Pharm. Intl. Ltd. (2016-2702, 2016-2708 April 13, 2018). Vanda...more