Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
The Federal Circuit's In re Cellect decision has caused a great deal of commentary and proposals to avoid its consequences, including changing prosecution strategies and filing prospective, precautionary terminal disclaimers...more
If the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is going to implement fee changes in January 2025, we should see a Federal Register Notice detailing the proposed fees soon. The USPTO started this round of fee-setting in April...more
IN RE CELLECT, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Obviousness-type double patenting analyses for patents with Patent Term Adjustments are based on the...more
35 U.S.C. § 101 precludes a patentee from obtaining more than one patent on the same invention. Courts have extended this prohibition “to preclude a second patent on an invention which ‘would have been obvious from the...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. introduced even more confusion in an already confusing area of the law – namely obviousness-type double patenting. Obviousness-type double patenting...more
In Magna Electronics, Inc. v. TRW Automotive Holdings Corp., No. 1:12-cv-654; 1:13-cv-324 (Dec. 10, 2015), Judge Maloney of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan granted TRW’s motion for partial summary...more
For patents granted on applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, the enforceable patent term begins on the day the patent issues and generally expires 20 years from the earliest effective filing date of the application. ...more
[When a patent issues] with its terminal disclaimer in effect, that disclaimer [becomes part of the "original patent" for purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 251 and serves] to define its term, regardless of any further term that might...more