Monthly Archives: February 2011

Centocor v. Abbott: Fed. Cir. Takes New Written Description Requirement Out For A Spin.

In an important post-Ariad decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court decision that Abbott’s Humira infringed claims of a Centocor patent that could have cost Abbott $1.67 billion in damages. (A copy of the decision is at the end … Continue reading

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

Mumbo Jumbo: The Patentability of Biological Materials In Australia

From Vaughn Barlow of Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. 1. Introduction The Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) Bill (2010) is currently being debated before the Australian parliament. The Bill seeks to ban the patenting of all biological … Continue reading

Posted in Non-U.S. Practice | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

AUTM Panel To Address A “Myriad” Of Challenges

Robert S. MacWright, J.D., Ph.D., the new head of tech transfer at the Salk Institute, will moderate a panel at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) on March 1st in Las Vegas.  The panel, … Continue reading

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

AIPLA Webinar on KSR Features Woessner and Lewis

On March 2nd, I will be presenting with Jeffrey Lewis of Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler in an AIPLA live online seminar entitled, “KSR and the Ripple Effect: Examining the Broad and Increasing Impact of KSR on Patent Litigation and … Continue reading

Posted in Conferences and Classes, Obviousness | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment