Tag Archives: USPTO

Cleveland Clinic II – Why Can’t a Diagnostic Conclusion be a Practical Application of a Natural Law?

Because the Federal Circuit says it can’t, that’s why!  In Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, 859 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the panel held patent-ineligible claims to a method of assessing a test subject’s risk of having … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Ex parte Ren-Hie Xu – Are Cultured Mammalian Cells Natural Products?

The Examiner in Appeal no. 2017-003416 (Mar. 1, 2019) had rejected this claim as directed to a natural product: “18. An in vitro culture comprising a substantially pure, replenishable population of synchronous primate trophoblast cells, wherein the synchronous primate trophoblast … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hikma and West-Ward v. Vanda – Are Methods of Medical Treatment Patent-Eligible?

Hikma Pharms. and West-Ward Pharms petition for cert. to reverse the Fed. Cir.’s decision in Vanda v. West-Ward that methods of medical treatment are patentable. The Supreme Court’s now-infamous Mayo decision, invalidated claims to a method for determining the optimal … Continue reading

Posted in 2017 Patent Review | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Athena v. Mayo Part II – Iancu v. The Federal Circuit(?)

The 2019 Revised Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance published on January 7th purported to revise the procedures for determining whether a patent claim or patent application claim is “directed to a judicial exception (laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas) … Continue reading

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