Category Archives: Section 101

Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. Cepheid – Are Primers “Natural Products”?

Anyone familiar with the fate of claims to primers used in PCR, to amplify a stretch of target DNA in order to determine whether or not a significant mutation is present, could write the opinion in this appeal (No. 2017-1690 … Continue reading

Posted in Section 101 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Director Iancu’s IPO Address and Judge Rich

Although Director Iancu’s address primarily aims at the difficulty of determining when a claim is directed to an abstract idea, his precursor guiding light is clearly the late Judge Giles Rich. Notably, Iancu quotes from Judge Rich. These quotes are … Continue reading

Posted in Section 101 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Remarks by Director Iancu at IPO’s Annual Meeting

USPTO director, Andrei Iancu, delivered remarks at the Intellectual Property Owners Association’s 46th Annual Meeting.  Dir. Iancu indicated that a major initiative is underway at the USPTO to reduce the arbitrary and capricious application of 101 patent ineligibility to patent applications.  To read … Continue reading

Posted in Section 101 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

BIO IP & Diagnostics Conference – Is the Titanic Turning Around?

On September 28th, I will be moderating a panel on patenting diagnostic tests – and related subject matter – such as methods of medical treatment, at BIO’s annual IP & Diagnostics Symposium in Alexandria, VA. At the beginning of 2018, … Continue reading

Posted in BIO, Section 101 | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment