Tag Archives: USPTO

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

Posted on April 4, 2019 by Warren Woessner

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?

Posted on March 27, 2019 by Warren Woessner

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?

Posted on March 5, 2019 by Warren Woessner

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(?)

Posted on February 7, 2019 by Warren Woessner

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