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
Tag Archives: intellectual property
TRANSMISSION OF INFORMATION IN EUROPE – PATENTABLE SUBJECT MATTER?
By Paul Cole, Lucas & Co., UK The UK counterpart of In re Ngai is Bayer’s (Meyer’s) Application [1984] R.P.C. 11. In that case a claim to a package containing a known drug together with instructions for a new use … Continue reading
Posted in Non-U.S. Practice
Tagged Bayer's Application, business methods, EPO, intellectual property, patents, Paul Cole, UK, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
Federal Circuit Reverses District Court's Finding that Generic Eloxatins do not Infringe Sanofi's Patent
In my June 22, 2009 post, I discussed the district court decision that found a claim to optically-pure oxaliplatin (U.S. Pat. No 5,338,874) not infringed by defendants who made it by processes other than the HPLC process disclosed in the … Continue reading
PTO Issues Interim Examination Instructions for Patentable Subject Matter and Invites Comments
On August 24, the PTO issued interim instructions (not rules) to guide Examiners post-Bilski. I did not see this as a major event, given that the Supreme Court will soon be reviewing the Bilski “machine or transformation” (M or T) … Continue reading
Posted in USPTO Practice and Policy
Tagged Bilski, Classen, intellectual property, USPTO, USPTO examiner, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH v. HEDRICK – ON A (CLEAR) CONCEPTION DAY
From a prosecutor’s standpoint, the ‘231 patent (link at bottom of this post) has “dream claims” to a new class of stem cells. Claim 1 reads: An isolated adipose-derived stem cell that can differentiate into two or more of the … Continue reading