Our monthly newsletter reports on the patent law developments in biotech, biologics and pharmaceutical cases, legislation and federal agency actions. This month’s issue covers relevant news from December 2019, including: The Solicitor General, on behalf of the US, asserts that the Supreme Court’s Section 101 precedent creates “substantial uncertainty” requiring clarification The Federal Circuit holds that there is no single entity equirement for infringement under section 271(g) A district court holds that, under certain circumstances,…

In a decision that will delight patent applicants, on December 11, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Peter v NantKwest, Inc.[1], holding that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) was not entitled to recover pro rata salaries for legal staff (in the context of the USPTO, attorney’s fees) as “expenses” in district court litigation.  In a brief opinion, the Supreme Court affirmed the “American Rule” presumption that parties bear their own attorney’s…

Our monthly newsletter reports on the patent law developments in biotech, biologics and pharmaceutical cases, legislation and federal agency actions. This month’s issue covers relevant news from November 2019, including: Federal Circuit affirms the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”)’s application of the “blocking patent” doctrine as applied to objective indicia of non-obviousness District court orders production of privileged documents reviewed by a Rule 30(b)(6) witness in preparation for her deposition More patent-busting draft legislation…

On November 25, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) affirmed an appeal from IBM that its invention fails to recite patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101. U.S. Patent Application Number 15/212,216 claimed a method for mining threaded online discussions, where an information handling system (IHS) would perform a natural language processing (NLP) analysis on multiple web sites containing threaded discussions of a particular…

Although the U.S. Supreme Court recently denied certiorari in Acorda Therapeutics v. Roxane Laboratories, which sought review of the “blocking patent” doctrine, expecting the doctrine’s appearance in obviousness cases across all technologies is logical and will undoubtedly speed the development of the law on a number of unanswered questions. Partner David Manspeizer explains further in an article for Law360 . Click here to read more.…

We are proud to report that our colleagues Christofer Eggers and Christian Boehler successfully represented Balema GmbH in its dispute with Consorzio Tutela Aceto Balsamico di Modena.  The ECJ held that that the term “Balsamico” is not protected as a designation of origin and geographical indication.…