Tag Archives: Federal Circuit

Ex parte Parenteau – PTAB Skips Step One of the Mayo/Alice Test?

In ex parte Ho, the subject of my last post, the PTAB reversed the Examiner’s rejection of claims to a population of bone marrow cells obtained by two-stage culturing that expressed or failed to express certain markers. The PTAB wrote … Continue reading

Posted in Section 101, Section 103 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ex Parte Nagy – The Reach of the Mayo/Alice Rule Exceeds Its Grasp?

The final rejection of the claims of Nagy’s application Serial No. 14/223,113 was affirmed by the PTAB on July 30, 2018 (Appeal 2017-008793). One of the “representative” claims was directed to the holy grail of diagnostics – the early diagnosis … Continue reading

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

Interval Licensing v. AOL — Judge Plager’s Concurring Dissent

The majority of the panel in Interval Licensing v AOL, Appeal no. 2016-2502, -05, -06, -07 (Fed. Cir., July 20, 2018) affirmed the district court’s finding that claims 15-18 of U.S. Pat. No. 6,788,314 are invalid as attempting to claim … Continue reading

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

PTO Issues Section 101 Memorandum after Vanda Decision

I have posted twice recently on the Fed. Cir.’s opinion in Vanda Pharms., Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Int’l, Ltd., Appeal no. 2016-2107 (Fed. Cir., April 18, 2018). The Fed. Cir. affirmed the district court’s ruling that Vanda’s claims in U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Federal Circuit, Opinion Practice, Section 101, USPTO Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment