Posts Tagged: enablement
Federal Circuit Says Amgen’s Repatha® Patent Claims Require ‘Undue Experimentation’ to Practice
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Thursday upheld the District of Delaware’s grant of judgment as a matter of law (…
Implications of Filing Subsequent Patent Applications in the United States (Part III)
In Part I, the authors reviewed the law behind subsequent patent applications. In Part II, we reviewed the different types of subsequent applications. Part III will discuss …
AAM v. Neapco Misreads Federal Circuit Precedent to Create a New Section 101 Enablement-like Legal Requirement – Part II
As detailed in Part I of this article, the recent opinion in AAM, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings, LLC, No. 18-1763 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020) misreads and misinterprets Supreme …
New Enablement-Like Requirements for 101 Eligibility: AAM v. Neapco Takes the Case Law Out of Context, and Too Far – Part I
With its recent opinion in AAM, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings, LLC, No. 18-1763 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020), and a 6-6 stalemate by the court’s active judges on …
An Emerging Section 101 Expansion to Section 112(a) Enablement? The Federal Circuit Should Stop It Now
The most dominant, divisive issue in patent law over the last decade—Section101-eligibility and the Supreme Court’s Mayo-Alice framework—appears to have just become more …
UK Supreme Court Refuses to ‘Water Down’ Sufficiency Requirement
Regeneron has lost a significant battle in its fight with Kymab over patents for transgenic mice. In a 4-1 split decision today, the UK Supreme Court found …
McRO Patent Upheld Again at Federal Circuit, But Not Infringed
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a precedential decision authored by Judge Taranto, today affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded a decision of the …
Federal Circuit Invalidity Determination for Idenix Underscores Continuing Intra-Circuit Split
One day before the now-famous Arthrex decision was issued, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided an appeal by Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC …
The PPH Program at the USPTO: Favorable Stats Don’t Alleviate Big Risks
Since 2006, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has participated in the Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program (the PPH Program). Generally, the program is designed to …
Pinning False Blame of Lack of Enablement In Issued Patents On the USPTO
Last week, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, held an oversight hearing on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) with …
Anatomy of a Valuable Patent: Building on the Structural Uniqueness of an Invention
From a conceptual standpoint, it would seem logical to assume that writing text to describe a particular invention ought to be easy for the inventor of that …
District of Delaware Makes it Harder to Corner the Market on Antibody Patents in MorphoSys v. Janssen
Patents covering an antibody are often claimed by the antibody’s function (the residues where it binds to the antigen) rather than its structure (amino-acid sequence). This …
Delaware Jury Awards $24 Million Royalty to Bio-Rad and University of Chicago, Finds Patent Infringement Willful
A jury in the United Stated Federal District Court for the District of Delaware recently delivered a verdict awarding nearly $24 million dollars in reasonable royalty damages to …
How to Write a Patent Application
Writing a patent application is not as easy as many think. Indeed, the concept of usefully describing the invention, which on its face seems easy enough to …
Which Invalidity Avenue to Take: Inter Partes Review Verses Post-Grant Review
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) provides invalidity tools via inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), but which route is better? ... PGRs are …
