Monthly Archives: July 2016

Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation et al.

Docket No. 2015-1244 MOORE, TARANTO, HUGHES May 12, 2016 Brief Summary: DC finding that database-related patents are invalid under § 101 reversed; grant of SJ for anticipation vacated; and judgment of non-infringement affirmed. Summary: Enfish appealed DC finding that the … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Means-plus-function, Patentability | Leave a comment

The Medicines Company (“MedCo”) v. Hospira, Inc.

Docket No. 2014-1469, -1504 En banc opinion July 11, 2016 Brief Summary: En banc opinion concluded “a product produced pursuant to the claims of a product-by-process patent is ‘on sale’ under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)…must be the subject of a … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), On-Sale Bar | Leave a comment

Amgen Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2016-1308 WALLACH, BRYSON, TARANTO July 5, 2016 Update: Petition for a writ of certiorari denied (12/12/16) Brief Summary: DC grant of preliminary injunction against Apotex regarding a biosimilar Neulasta® affirmed (“an applicant must provide a reference product sponsor … Continue reading

Posted in Biosimilars, Generics / ANDA | Leave a comment

Nanoco Technologies, Ltd. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

IPR2015-00528 (U.S. Pat. No. 6,322,901 C1) Final Written Decision July 5, 2016 Brief Summary: Petition found to show by preponderance of the evidence that certain claims of MIT’s quantum dot ‘901 patent were anticipated under § 102(a) by first reference; … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. et al. v. CellzDirect, Inc. (subsidiary of Invitrogen)

Docket No. 2015-1570 PROST, MOORE, STOLL July 5, 2016 Brief Summary: DC determination that claims to methods for preserving hepatocytes are ineligible under § 101 vacated and remanded (inventors “employed their natural discovery…to create a new and improved” method). Summary: … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility, AT&T Corp.

Docket No. 2015-1763 NEWMAN, O’MALLEY, CHEN June 27, 2016 Brief Summary: DC decision granting motion to dismiss based on its finding of ineligibility under § 101 vacated and remanded (claims were found not to “preempt all ways of filtering content … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

Oakville Hills Cellar, Inc. dba Dalla Valle Vineyards v. Georgallis Holdings, LLC

Docket No. 2016-1103 LOURIE, MOORE, CHEN June 24, 2016 Brief Summary: Board decision of no likelihood of confusion of wine-related marks MAYA and MAYARI affirmed. Summary: Oakville appealed PTO Board dismissal of its opposition to Georgallis’ application to register the … Continue reading

Posted in Trademarks | Leave a comment