Personalized medical intervention is in a transformative phase as artificial intelligence algorithms are increasingly deployed to tailor treatments for individual patients based on their unique characteristics. Developers...more
GenAI, or Generative AI, has seen a surge in patenting activity with China leading the way in filing patent applications for this technology. The landscape analysis by WIPO reveals Tencent, Ping An Insurance Group, and Baidu...more
Between 2014-2023, China has filed more patent applications (38,000) covering Generative AI (GenAI) technology than another other country, six times more than second place United States, as reported by the World Intellectual...more
Hosted by C5 Group, the 21st Annual Life Sciences IP Summit returns for another exciting year with curated programming with speakers from the pharma, biotech and medical device industries that will provide practical insights...more
Precision or personalized medicine seeks to find the right treatment for each patient at the right time based on the patient’s genes, proteins and other personal characteristics. The approach has been successfully used to...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published the latest revision to its Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) on June 30, 2020. According to the Executive Summary, in this revision, nearly all of the...more
On January 21 and 22, 2020, the 8th annual McDermott International Seminars took place in Osaka and Tokyo. These seminars focused on cross-border M&A, GDPR, intellectual property, global enforcement and other key topics....more
We previously discussed the new personalized medicine example in the USPTO’s October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update. Here, we look at the new nature-based product example, and consider how it may impact...more
In OSI Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Aoptex Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018-1925, Oct. 4, 2019), the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (Board) decision that certain claims of US Patent No. 6,900,221 were...more
In a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit held as patent-ineligible patent claims to personalized therapy to treat patients who would benefit from inhaled nitric oxide treatment and withhold treatment from patients...more
As discussed in a previous blog post, since Mayo v. Prometheus, critics of medical treatment patents have advocated that such patents should be banned from patenting. While such arguments seemed futile based on the consistent...more
In its non-precedential decision in INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc., the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that method of treatment claims reciting “excluding” specific patients from treatment...more
On January 4, 2019, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced revised guidance for determining subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for computer-implemented inventions (Guidance). The Guidance takes...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
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) the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued two memos...more
In Praxair Distrib., Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Hospital Prods. IP Ltd., the Federal Circuit found that the printed matter doctrine applies equally to physically embodied information and mental steps, and can be invoked in the...more
On April 13, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Int’l Ltd upholding the validity of U.S. Patent 8,586,610 (“the ’610...more
For those of you who may have lost hope regarding the patentability of personalized medicine discoveries, here’s some encouragement. Recently the Federal Circuit affirmed the validity of a patent directed to a method of...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
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
The Federal Circuit recently held claims for a personalized medicine treatment were patent eligible and valid. The claims at issue were directed toward administering specific dosages of a drug in the presence or absence of a...more
In Ex Parte Timothy, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) affirmed the Examiner’s rejection of personalized medicine treatment claims. This decision highlights the PTAB’s willingness to invalidate claims that it...more
As traditional biomedical research and data science have converged, we have seen an influx of patent application filings in this newly developing space. The prepar?ation and prosecution of these cross-disciplinary patent...more
The Federal Circuit decision in Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, strikes another blow against the patent eligibility of diagnostic methods and highlights the difficulty of enforcing personalized...more
While the Supreme Court decisions in Myriad and Mayo have been applied to diagnostic-type claims, method of treatment patents were thought to be safe from the recent judicial expansion of the patent-(in)eligibility doctrine....more