Tag Archives: WDR

Centocor v. Abbott: Fed. Cir. Takes New Written Description Requirement Out For A Spin.

In an important post-Ariad decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court decision that Abbott’s Humira infringed claims of a Centocor patent that could have cost Abbott $1.67 billion in damages. (A copy of the decision is at the end … Continue reading

Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Centocor v. Abbott Labs. – “Antibody Exception” To Written Description Requirement Under Fire

Abbott Laboratories markets a recombinant human antibody, HUMIRA, as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. This antibody binds to a receptor on TNF. NYU and Centocor own US Pat No 7070775 which claims an isolated recombinant anti-TNF-a antibody (Ab) comprising a … Continue reading

Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ariad v. Lilly Comes Down (On Us) – Judge Lourie Rules!

In a majority opinion authored by Judge Lourie for the Federal Circuit sitting en banc (Appeal No. 2008-1248 (Fed. Cir. March 22, 2010)) (a PDF of which is attached to the end of this post), the court held that there … Continue reading

Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

WILL THE NIGHTMARE FOR BIOTECH PREP/PROS NEVER END?

I recently gave a talk on patenting biomarkers, and was asked to talk about “push-back” by the courts and the PTO against getting useful patent claims in this emerging area (the gateway to “personalized medicine.” I was struck with how … Continue reading

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