Tag Archives: Eli Lilly

TALKING WRITTEN DESCRIPTION REQUIREMENT BLUES – ARIAD WOBBLES

Posted on October 12, 2009 by Warren Woessner

On October 5, 2009, Ariad filed a 60 page brief (not counting attached appendices) with the Federal Circuit in support of its appeal in Ariad v. Lilly. (Attached below.) As you will recall from my post of August 24th, the … Continue reading →

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

NATURE/BIOTECHNOLOGY SUMMARIZES ARIAD DECISION

Posted on June 10, 2009 by Warren Woessner

A recent article by Ken Garber in Nature/Biotechnology, 27, 494 (June 2009) summarizes the recent Federal Circuit decision invalidating the claims-in-suit in Ariad v. Lilly for failure to meet the WDR. (See my post of April 13, 2009 “Federal Circuit … Continue reading →

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

Patent Office Bats Down Ariad’s ‘Hail Mary Claims’ In Reexamination

Posted on April 22, 2009 by Warren Woessner

In my earlier post on Ariad v Lilly, there is a detailed discussion of the Federal Circuit’s recent decision that invalidated all of the claims-in-suit for failure to meet the written description requirement. The Federal Circuit rejected Lilly’s attempts to … Continue reading →

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal Circuit Throws a Wrench into “Mechanism of Action” Claims

Posted on April 13, 2009 by Warren Woessner

A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently decided Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v. Eli Lilly & Company, appeal no. 2008-1248 (Fed. Cir. April 3, 2009), involving Blatimore et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 6,410,516). … Continue reading →

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