Monthly Archives: May 2010


Recently, in a notably unremarked decision, the Board reversed the Examiner, effectively canceling all of the claims to pluripotent human embryonic stem cells (ES) in Thomson (U.S. Pat. No. 7029913): The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights v. Patent of Wisconsin Alumni … Continue reading

Posted in Obviousness | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Chisum On Patents – Live in Seattle!

The Chisum Patent Academy will offer its second annual Intensive Patent Law Training Workshop at its offices in Seattle, Washington, on July 29-31, 2010.  See  The workshop will focus on substantive patent law (patentability and enforcement) through analysis of critical … Continue reading

Posted in Conferences and Classes | Tagged | Leave a comment

A “Myriad” Of Questions To Resolve? Back To The Basics Of 101

Thinking about Judge Sweet’s recent decision in Ass’n of Molecular Pathologists v. USPTO et al. (The “Myriad Decision”), I am again struck by the wide path the good judge slashed through the field (or is it the jungle now) of … Continue reading

Posted in Patentable Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Director Kappos Comments on Ariad v. Lilly

USPTO David Kappos recently posted a comment on the Fed. Cir. decision in Ariad v. Lilly in which he noted that the Fed. Cir. held that broad functional claims (presumably mechanism-of-action claims) must be supported by sufficient species (read “working examples”). While … Continue reading

Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment