Revisiting McGirt: New Legal Developments Challenge Oklahoma’s Landmark Ruling
Today, the Supreme Court requested the views of the Solicitor General in its consideration of American Axle's certiorari petition, which asks the Court to reverse the Federal Circuit's decision in American Axle & Mfg. v....more
In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Section 101 patent eligibility cases again, and again, and again. But is 2021 the year that the Supreme Court finally addresses the topic? Maybe. I'm hesitant to say yes....more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...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
The prominent state of patent litigation in the United States and Germany is due not only to the size of its markets, but also to a recent increase in hearings before the U.S. International Trade Commission and the Patent...more
On May 4th the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued its latest Guidance on how Examiners are to apply recent U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent related to subject matter eligibility (see "USPTO Issues Update...more
On July 14, 2016, the USPTO issued a Memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps on patent eligibility in view of recent court decisions. The July 2016 Memorandum extracts more guidance for assessing patent eligibility from the...more
In its July 5, 2016 decision in Rapid Litigation Management Ltd and In Vitro, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc. and Invitrogen Corp., the Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to an improved method of cryopreserving...more
Supreme Court: Status Quo in Cuozzo - Why it matters: On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, where it rejected challenges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes...more
“If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all” can be good words to live by, but in the context of the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Sequenom, the silence is deafening–and could have a chilling impact...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has denied certiorari in Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. (No. 15-1182), declining to review the Federal Circuit’s June 12, 2015, decision that certain methods of detecting paternally...more
The United States Supreme Court is set to render its decision on the grant or denial of Sequenom, Inc.’s (“Sequenom’s”) petition for writ of certiorari that posed the issue: ..Whether a novel method is patent-eligible...more
Earlier this month, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued updated guidance to its examining corps concerning subject matter eligibility rejections and responses under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The 2016 Guidance,...more
On March 21, 2016, Sequenom filed a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to provide clarification regarding the limits of 35 U.S.C §101 as it relates to patent eligibility of diagnostic tests....more