Monthly Archives: January 2014

Medtronic CoreValve LLC et al. v. Edwards LifeSciences Corp., et al.

Docket No. 2013-1117 PROST, PLAGER, TARANTO January 22, 2014 Brief Summary: Patent found anticipated by earlier priority application because priority was not correctly claimed under 35 U.S.C. § 120 (did not recite each and every intervening application). Summary: Medtronic appealed … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Priority | Leave a comment

In re Naren Chaganti

Docket No. 2013-1372 MOORE, SCHALL, REYNA (per curiam) January 27, 2014 Non-precedential Brief Summary: PTAB findings of obviousness affirmed (analogous art, no teaching away, no hindsight (common sense)) with warning that reasons to combine must be clearly articulated. Summary: Naren … Continue reading

Posted in Obviousness | Leave a comment

SmartGene, Inc. v. Advanced Biological Laboratories, SA et al.

Docket No. 2013-1186 LOURIE, DYK, TARANTO January 24, 2014 Non-precedential Brief Summary: Patents for selecting medical treatment options using a computer found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as providing nothing more than “doctors can and do perform in their … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC

Docket No. 12-1128 U.S. Supreme Court (Breyer) January 22, 2014 Brief Summary: Where a patentee alleges infringement by a licensee and the licensee moves for DJ of non-infringement, the burden of proof remains with the patentee to show infringement (e.g., … Continue reading

Posted in Licensing, U.S. Supreme Court | Leave a comment

Novartis AG et al. v. Michelle K. Lee (USPTO)

Docket No. 2013-1160, -1179 NEWMAN, DYK, TARANTO January 15, 2014 Brief Summary: Under 35 § 154(b)(1)(B), the patent term adjustment time should be calculated by determining the length of time between application and patent issuance, then substracting any continued examination … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Term Extension | Leave a comment

In re Enhanced Security Research, LLC

Docket No. 2013-1114 DYK, O’MALLEY(D), TARANTO January 13, 2014 Brief Summary: Board decision of obviousness affirmed as reference found to have been publicly available and diligence in reduction to practice could not be shown from attorney’s records. Summary: Enhanced Security … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Diligence, Obviousness | Leave a comment

Allergan, Inc. et al. v. Athena Cosmetics, Inc.

Docket No. 2013-1286 RADER, MOORE, WALLACH December 30, 2013 Brief Summary: DC finding that Athena violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by marketing, distributing and selling products that qualify as drugs without regulatory approval affirmed. The nationwide permanent injunction by … Continue reading

Posted in Generics / ANDA, Injunction | Leave a comment

Institut Pasteur & Universite Pierre Et Marie Curie v. Precision Biosciences, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2012-1485 NEWMAN, CLEVENGER, TARANTO December 30, 2013 Brief Summary: Board’s obviousness conclusions were reversed for one patent and vacated for another because of factual errors in the Board’s reasoning and its failure to properly consider evidence of “industry … Continue reading

Posted in Obviousness, Reexamination | Leave a comment