Author Archives: Warren Woessner

Bayh-Dole Act Turns Thirty – Dec. 1st Fete Planned

With major litigation looming over invention ownership rights affected by the Bayh Dole Act (see my post of November 3rd on Stanford v. Roche), the link below is to a site created by AUTM and a number of other organizations … Continue reading

Posted in Tech Transfer | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Let’s Get Physical! Australian Patent Office Wrestles With Method Claims

The Australian Patent Office appears to grappling with the requirement that a physical effect take place in order for a business method to be patentable.  This note sent by Bill Bennett of Pizzeys Patent and Trademark Attorneys raises interesting issues about the need for … Continue reading

Posted in Non-U.S. Practice | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

PTO Proposes Simplified Appeal Process – Compared to What?

  On November 15th, Director Kappos published 21 pages of proposed rulemaking entitled “Rules of Practice Before the [BPAI] in Ex parte Appeals.” 75 Fed. Reg. 69828 (Nov. 15, 2010). (A copy is available at the end of this post.) … Continue reading

Posted in USPTO Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal Circuit Clarifies Prosecution Laches

  The facts of Cancer Research Tech. v. Barr Labs., Inc., App. No. 2010-1204 (Fed. Cir. November 9, 2010) (PDF at end of post) are almost more interesting than the holding, which is : “We…now hold that to establish [the … Continue reading

Posted in Post-Grant Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment