Section » Patent Prosecution
Meeting Ariad’s Written Description Requirement
Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, No. 2008-1248 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 22, 2010) (en banc) In a much anticipated decision, the Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision addressing the scope of the “written description” requirement of 35
More Articles
Best Mode for Producing Lysine Included Undisclosed Features
In method for producing L-lysine including genetically altering E. coli, inventors failed to disclose best host strain to use and further modification that enhanced production. Ajinomoto Co. v. ITC, 2009-1081 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 8, 2010) In
New Trial for Inconsistent Verdict of Nonobvious Independent Claim, Obvious Dependent Claims
JMOL on validity reversed because judge misunderstood when art is analogous; claim constructions using dictionary and prosecution argument upheld. A JMOL on validity of the dependent claims to cure an inconsistent jury verdict for obviousness of claims dependent on nonobvious independent claims could
Patents Obvious Over Same Prior Art Raised During Ex Parte Reexamination
Dissent finds a bias against protecting an invention that “does not advance rocket science or cancer medicine.” A divided Federal Circuit panel affirmed summary judgment that claims in Media Tech’s two patents to trading cards with attached items or fragments of memorabilia were obvious over prior
A Tale of Two Entrepreneurs
A comparison of two recent Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) decisions demonstrates the difficulty of establishing nonobviousness, to the Board’s satisfaction, through evidence of commercial success. While in KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc. the Supreme Court rejected a “rigid