4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Corporate Perspectives on Intellectual Property
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - U.S. State Data Privacy Update
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
On June 22, 2023, Sens. Thom Tillis and Chris Coons proposed the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 (the Act). The new legislation is intended to clarify patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in view of the Supreme...more
On July 31, the Federal Circuit withdrew its opinion in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC and provided a substitute opinion. The court’s goal was to clarify why a claim directed to manufacturing a...more
The esteemed authors of Patent Docs have written of the need to reconsider the Federal Circuit's approach to section 101 eligibility, given the court's latest expansion and en-banc vote on subject-matter eligibility in AAM v....more
The Federal Circuit's inchoate attempts to fashion a consistent, rational application of the Supreme Court's recent subject matter eligibility jurisprudence, while understandably Herculean in view of the difficulties inherent...more
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC - Before Dyk, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims directed to a law of nature, without more, may not be...more
Federal Circuit (Again) Hands Down Revised Opinion in Response to Petition for Rehearing - Recently the Federal Circuit has begun a practice of withdrawing an original opinion and handing down a substitute opinion in...more
Federal Circuit Hands Down Modified Opinion in Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. Earlier this year, the Federal Circuit (somewhat surprisingly) found claims of two Sequenom patents directed to methods for...more
Patent eligibility is a bit of a mess these days. Ever since the Supreme Court handed down the Alice v. CLS Bank decision six years ago, the distinction between what might be subject matter that can be patented and what is...more
It has nearly been ten years since the Supreme Court’s landmark Mayo v. Prometheus (132 S.Ct. 1289 (2012)) decision, in which the Court established a two-prong test for determining patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §...more
Case Summary- On March 17, 2020, the Federal Circuit found that patents claiming methods of preparing an extracellular fraction of cell-free DNA that is enriched in fetal DNA were patent eligible and not invalid under 35...more
In a post-truth world, it is more tempting than ever to evaluate data based on gut instinct, intuition, and anecdotal evidence. It is thus refreshing when results of a robust statistical analysis are published, even if the...more
Nearly five years ago the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided the controversial case of Ariosa v. Sequenom. In Sequenom the invention was a radically new method of fetal genetic testing by amplifying...more
This month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has handed down a pair of opinions concerning Section 101 in the field of pharmaceuticals and life sciences. In both cases, the district courts held claims of the...more
The latest Federal Circuit decision on subject matter eligibility in the life sciences came down (by a divided court) in favor of eligibility, in Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. The claims at issue fell into the...more
Ever since the Supreme Court's decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories was handed down in 2012, diagnostic method claims have been routinely invalidated by the district courts and those decisions...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
The PTAB Cannot Approve or Deny Certificates of Correction - In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Arkema Inc., Arkema France, Appeal Nos. 2018-1151, -1153, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) does not have the...more
In a breathtaking decision, the Federal Circuit has ruled that a patented method of making an automobile drive shaft is not eligible to be patented because it is “directed to a natural law.” In so ruling, the court has...more
The USPTO has released updated subject matter eligibility guidance that incorporates comments on the changes made in January 2019.The guidance is 22 pages long, with three appendices and 87 footnotes. Below are a few of the...more
In a case relating to methods for genotyping a canine breed, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims were not subject matter eligible...more
The Federal Circuit provided an undesirable reminder to The University of Bern (and many other patent owners): a positive and valuable contribution does not necessarily equate to patentable subject matter. Here, the Court...more
The federal appeals court with jurisdiction over questions of patent law has consistently held that methods of diagnosing a disease or other biological condition violate the Supreme Court’s ban on patenting “natural...more
On April 17, 2019, U.S. District Judge William Martinez of the District of Colorado upheld the subject matter eligibility of United Cannabis Corporation’s (“UCANN”) patent claims covering liquid cannabinoid formulations....more
In April, we posted an article titled “Section 101 in 2019” summarizing the existing patent eligibility test, discussing recent Federal Circuit decisions, and providing practical strategies for practitioners to navigate the...more
On April 17, 2019, Senators Tillis (R-NC) and Coons (D-DE), along with a bipartisan group of three members of the House of Representatives, announced the release of a framework on Section 101 patent reform. Senators Tillis...more