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
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
How has President Trump's "America First" philosophy affected US patent policy? White & Case partners discussed what an evolving US patent policy will mean for other nations, and to propose effective responses....more
Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more
As evidenced recently in the United States, it may be difficult to tell what categories of inventions are eligible for patent protection in foreign jurisdictions. To further complicate issues, standards of eligible subject...more
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s Mayo and Alice decisions, uncertainty has surrounded what inventions are patent eligible in the United States. In Mayo and Alice, the Supreme Court developed a two-step test to determine...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a memorandum on June 7 (the “Memorandum”), providing much-needed guidance to patent examiners as to whether method of treatment claims are to be considered patent-eligible...more
Priority Claims Cannot Be Incorporated by Reference - In Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Limited, Appeal Nos. 2016-2707 and 2016-2708, the Federal Circuit held that when a patent for a...more