Filewrapper

Antibody Claim Strategies After the Amgen v. Sanofi Decisions

By Charles P. Romano, Ph.D.

Monoclonal antibodies (“mAb”) which specifically bind therapeutic targets dominate the biopharmaceutical market with global sales revenues estimated at nearly US$163 billion in 2019. Prior to the 2017, mAb were often protected in the US by broad claims which described the therapeutic target (i.e., the “antigen”) that the mAb could bind since such mAb could be […]

Continue Reading →

Deposit of biological material and the differing national laws

By Brian D. Keppler, Ph.D.

For patent applications in the biotechnology area, a biological material is sometimes essential for carrying out the invention. The biological material can be any material capable of reproducing itself or being reproduced in a biological system, including bacteria, fungi, algae, eukaryotic cells, cell lines, hybridomas, plasmids, viruses, and plant seeds. If the biological material cannot […]

Continue Reading →

Has the Federal Circuit Made It Nearly Impossible to Maintain Genus Claims?

By Blog Staff

A recent denial by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to hear an appeal by Merck’s Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC (Idenix), leaves unanswered questions regarding the overall validity of genus claims, particularly within the biopharma field. The SCOTUS denied a petition for writ of certiorari to clarify certain Section 112 requirements with respect to […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO Director Andrei Lancu Takes a Look at Early Prosecution

This week, the USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu, testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In his written statement Director Iancu wrote on topics related to early prosecution that would result in lower costs to clients and would speed up the process of obtaining a patent. A new pilot program that will allow for a pre-search Examiner […]

Continue Reading →

Court of Appeals Gets Specific with Enablement

In Storer v. Clark, the Court of Appeals explored whether a provisional application had sufficiently enabled interference subject matter.  In order to prove enablement it must be shown that “one skilled in the art, having read the specification, could practice the invention without ‘undue experimentation.’” ALZA Corp. v. Andrx Pharm., LLC, 603 F.3d 935, 940 […]

Continue Reading →

Post-Grant Reviews under the America Invents Act

The America Invents Act implemented the Post-grant Review (PGR) process as a new means of challenging existing patents. PGR differs from Inter Partes Review (IPR) in that PGR allows for a wider array of invalidity challenges. One example of a new challenge allowed under PGR is the ability to challenge the claims as being indefinite. […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit-Statements in Application Properly Used to Enable Prior Art

One of the basic requirements for the grant of a patent by the USPTO is the invention must be shown to be “new.”In practice, this means that the invention must be sufficiently different from the existing prior art, including patents, publications, and existing products. However, in order for a piece of prior art to preclude […]

Continue Reading →

2014 Supreme Court Cases Relating to Intellectual Property

On January 10, 2014 the Supreme Court agreed to review a variety of intellectual property cases in the upcoming session, including two patent cases, a copyright case, and a trademark case (including Lanham Act claim). A brief overview of these cases is provided and more detail will be available once decisions are entered by the […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit Confirms Invalidity for Overbroad Written Description

Novozymes v. DuPont Nutrition Biosciences involved patent 7,713,723 directed toward recombinant Bacillus alpha-amylase enzymes engineered to have enhanced acid tolerance and heat tolerance. The patent owner, Plaintiffs-Appellants Novozymes, sued DuPont for infringement. DuPont defended on grounds of non-infringement and invalidity and countersued for a declaratory judgment that the '723 patent was invalid for failing to […]

Continue Reading →

New and Useful – July 10, 2013

· InConvolve v. Compaq Computer the Federal Circuit affirmed in part the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ruling that Compaq Computer Corp., Seagate Technology, LLC., and Seagate Technology, Inc. did not misappropriate 11 of 15 alleged trade secrets from Convolve, Inc. In addition, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up