Patent Baristas

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that Stanford University can’t win its patent infringement case against Roche Molecular Systems because Roche holds an ownership interest in the patents. Board of Trustees of The Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al., Supreme Court of the United States, 563 U. S. ____ (2011). […]

After filing a series of five continuation-in-part (“CIP”) applications, which added new matter , a patent finally issued containing claims covering Abbott’s antibody.  Centocor then relied on the added material as evidence of written description to support later asserted claims. The Federal Circuit poo-poohed the idea saying that PTO guidelines prevent claiming a high affinity, […]

In a paper published by the Washington Legal Foundation, entitled Supreme Court To Address Standard For Induced Patent Infringement, Brian Pandya of Wiley Rein LLP present an examination of Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB, S.A. The U.S. Supreme Court will hold oral argument in the case today. The Supreme Court has ruled in nine patent […]

Translation has traditionally been one of the more over-looked aspects of the patent and intellectual property business, but with the IP landscape continuing to grow and expand across international borders, it has become a vital part of the overall “IP workflow.” Whether it’s translating a patent application for filing in another country, patent examiners at […]

Senators Patrick Leahy, Orrin Hatch, and Chuck Grassley introduced The Patent Reform Act of 2011, which has been placed on the Judiciary Committee’s agenda for their first executive business meeting. The provisions and language of the bill look a lot like items in the long-pending legislation that were part of a compromise that was announced […]

In September 2009, we reported on an Australian Patent Office (APO) decision relating to an application for an extension of patent term for a trans-dermal patch.  The application for an extension of patent term was denied by the APO on the basis that the claim was not directed to a “pharmaceutical substance” as is required […]

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is implementing a pilot program (Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program) in which an applicant can request a twelve-month time period to pay certain fees and to reply to a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application. Under the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, applicant must file […]

The APO has issued a decision which has created uncertainty regarding the patentability of business methods. Until recently, our advice to clients was that business methods were patentable in AU, provided that the claims were limited to execution of the business method in a computer environment. The APO has now issued the Iowa Lottery decision […]