Tag Archives: Federal Circuit

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

Fed. Cir. Affirms Unclean Hands Defense in Gilead v. Merck

On April 25th, a Fed. Cir. panel of Judges Taranto, Clevenger and Chen affirmed the unenforceability of two Merck patents covering a drug presently marketed as Sovaldi(r) to treat hepatitis C, sofosbuvir. Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Merck & Co., Appeal … Continue reading

Posted in Federal Court, Litigation Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Federal Circuit Circumvents Mayo/Alice Rule in Vanda v. West-Ward

After Cleveland Clinic, IP practitioners were left to speculate about the fate of claims directed to methods of medical treatment. These claims seemed next in line for extinction by the Mayo/Alice rule, which I will paraphrase: “If a patent claim … Continue reading

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

Rapid Litigation v. CellzDirect – A Break in the 101 Wall

On July 5, 2016, a three – judge Fed. Circuit panel of Moore, Prost and Stoll (Appeal no. 2015-1570) reversed the district court’s holding that claims to a method of isolating “hardy” twice -frozen hepatocytes (as I called them in my … Continue reading

Posted in Patentable Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment