Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Mayo Collaborative Services et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012), the lower courts have repeatedly found patent claims for medical diagnostic methods to be ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C §101. In Mayo, the Supreme Court held that a claim for correlating levels of a drug metabolite in a patient’s blood to drug efficacy was not patent eligible under §101, because the claim at issue merely recited a law of nature — one of the judicial exceptions to patent eligible subject matter under §101.
*May exclude premium content
By Li-Jen Shen, Cory Smith and George C. Chen
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has finally filled a gap left by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the standard for finding deceptive intent when trying to prove fraud on the USPTO.
By Robert W. Clarida and Robert J. Bernstein
The Ninth Circuit ruling in Flo & Eddie may turn out to be last stop on the long and winding road the owners of pre-1972 recordings have traveled in their efforts to obtain compensation for public performances through platforms like Sirius.
By Willem Klein
Patent marking is an important step in the patent lifecycle as it is generally required to seek damages from infringers prior to the date the suit is filed. While virtual marking has somewhat reduced the overhead of marking, it suffers from the same problems all Internet-based evidence runs into in court: websites are ephemeral and have intermittent accessibility, as well as poor public logging of when information existed where, and for how long. NFTs on a digital blockchain could potentially overcome these hurdles, while still providing the benefits of virtual marking via websites.
By Joshua R. Stein and Jeffrey S. Ginsberg
Pair of Federal Circuit Decisions Address Standing to Appeal Adverse IPR Decision