Patent Licensing and Transactions

Since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Mayo and Myriad, the Federal Circuit has expanded the holdings and invalidated more patents directed to biological discoveries. If the newly discovered correlations and properties of what is found in nature cannot be patented, what strategies for protection are left for companies doing biological research?

Stanford Law School made available to the public a database of every patent lawsuit that's been filed since 2007.

Part Two of a Two-Part Article

USPTO Attempts to Provide Greater Clarity for Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

Part One of a Two-Part Article Congress is empowered to create a patent system to promote the useful arts, and it has enacted laws to create a patent system that encourages innovation. Balancing that power, however, the courts in recent years have tried to rein in the scope of the patent right by limiting the scope of patent-eligible subject matter.

An IPR might be more efficiently accomplished through arbitration than through a PTAB proceeding, so it should be considered by practitioners.

Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Does Not Invalidate Section 156 Patent Term Extension
Federal Circuit Holds Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in IPR Context
Federal Circuit Reverses District Court Holding of Patent Ineligibility of Computer Security Patent

Beginning on Nov. 13, 2018, the USPTO will cease to apply the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard for newly-filed IPR, PGR, and CBM trials under the America Invents Act (AIA). Instead, the USPTO will begin "using the same claim construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action …."

The stage is set for the 24-year-old north American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to end and the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA), which has implications for intellectual property, to take its place.