Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 
Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
-
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner
Pages
Archives
Author Archives: Warren Woessner
Novartis v. Breckenridge: Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Explained
Without trying to summarize this well-written opinion by Judge Chen, I simply recommend that you store it somewhere and pull it out when you have a tricky obviousness-type double-patenting situation and want a thorough review of the doctrine. The opinion … Continue reading
Posted in Double Patenting, Obviousness
Tagged Abbvie, Breckenridge, Double Patenting, Gilead, Novartis, Obviousness
Leave a comment
IP Update – Canada | New Patent Rules released: 12 Notable Changes & Tips
Guest Post from David Schwartz and Jeff Leuschner of Smart & Biggar. On December 1, 2018, the Canadian government released its proposed new Patent Rules in the Canada Gazette, Part I. This is one of the last steps necessary for implementing significant changes … Continue reading
Life Science Patenting to Iancu – “We need help too!”
In his remarks presented at the recent 10th Annual Patent Law & Policy Conference at Georgetown University Law School, USPTO Director Andrei Iancu outlined the analytical framework for the new, eagerly awaited, PTO Guidance on patent eligible subject matter. Although … Continue reading
Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter
Tagged Alice, Andrei Iancu, Bilski, Diehr, Federal Circuit, Mayo, Myriad, s. 101, USPTO
Leave a comment
Kumar v. Iancu – The Dangers of an Overstuffed Preamble/Note on 37 CFR Part 4.
On November 7, 2018, the Fed. Cir. issued a summary affirmance of the PTAB’s interference decision of September 6, 2016, in Kumar v. Sung (Patent Interference 14/322,039) which found that the claims of U.S. Pat. No. 8,541,422 were obvious over … Continue reading