Menu
On November 7, 2017, the USPTO issued a final rule establishing that communications “between a client and a USPTO patent practitioner or a foreign jurisdiction patent practitioner that is reasonably necessary and incident to the scope of the practitioner’s authority shall receive the same protections of privilege under Federal law as if that communication were… Read more »
The PTAB found that methods for treating patients using the chemotherapy drug Jevtana were unpatentable in light of references that taught administering the drug, but were silent on the drug’s clinical efficacy.1 The Board disagreed with Aventis that the claim’s preamble required clinical efficacy, and indeed found the preamble to be non-limiting. Representative independent claims of… Read more »
In a recent appeal of a rejection based on the written description requirement, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) found a claimed invention directed to a featherseal structure to be sufficiently supported by the illustration of a single embodiment in the specification.1 Under the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) or §… Read more »
In two recent companion cases, the Federal Circuit upheld the Board’s decision that claims related to administering a natural stereoisomer to treat symptoms of folate deficiency would have been obvious. During the inter partes review, the Board considered two prior art references: a European patent application that discloses treating elevated levels of homocysteine, often associated with folate… Read more »
The patent eligibility of diagnostic testing methods remains uncertain after the Federal Circuit refused to rehear Ariosa v. Sequenom.1 In Ariosa, the Federal Circuit panel found that Sequenom’s patent on fetal DNA testing was patent ineligible, despite noting the high commercial value of the technology. The panel concluded that the claims failed Mayo’s2 two step analysis for patent eligibility. The… Read more »
The Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB’s finding of nonobviousness of Verinata’s patent directed to methods of noninvasive prenatal testing, and remanded the case back to the Board.1 The Federal Circuit remanded because it couldn’t conclude whether the Board erred based on the PTAB’s opinion. The Board’s language was too vague to come to a definitive conclusion… Read more »
Summary At the end of last year, in Par Pharmaceuticals, the Federal Circuit affirmed the doctrine of inherent obviousness, but ultimately found that the defendants had not demonstrated that the claim limitation missing in the prior art was “necessarily . . . present, or the natural result of the combination of elements explicitly disclosed by… Read more »
Tel: (703) 712-8531
Address
Medler Ferro Woodhouse & Mills PLLC
8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1060
McLean, VA 22102
Phone and Fax
tel: (703) 712-8531
fax: (703) 712-8525
Address
info@medlerferro.com