Tag Archives: Mayo v Prometheus

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

PLANET BLUE v. NAMCO – Abstract at the “Point of Novelty”

In McRO, Inc. d.b.a. Planet Blue v. Namco Bandai Games America, civ. No. CV 12-10322-GW (FFMx) (C. D. Cal., Sept. 22, 2014), the granted Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings that US Patent numbers 6,307,576 and 6,611, 278, were … Continue reading

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

Genetic Technologies v. LabCorp. – Mayo Redux.

It was Mayo redux with a vengeance in the September 23, 2014 decision in Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Laboratory Corp. of Amer. Holdings et al., Civil Action No. 12-1736-LPS-CJB (D. Del. 2014).  Magistrate Judge Burke released an opinion invalidating claim … Continue reading

Posted in Patentable Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Nautilus v. Biosig – Solving Insoluble Ambiguity?

Today the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Fed. Cir.’s standard for resolving challenges to validity under s.112 para.2, based on whether or not a claim was “amenable to construction” and not “insolubly ambiguous”. Noting that Nautilus had urged that a patent … Continue reading

Posted in Section 112(2) - Indefiniteness | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment