Tag Archives: ip

AMC v. Myriad – “Laws of Nature” Exception Does Not Include Isolated DNA

As noted in my last “flash” post, a divided three-judge Fed. Cir. panel (Judges Lourie, Bryson and Moore) issued an opinion holding that the isolated DNA sequences and the drug-screening method claimed by Myriad are patentable subject matter, not natural … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Divided Panel Finds DNA Molecules Patentable – Cancer Screening Claims Too Abstract

Today a divided Fed. Cir. panel of Judges Lourie, Moore and Bryson – Lourie writing for the “majority” – reversed the district court judge, in AMP v. Myriad, holding that isolated DNA sequences are patent-eligible subject matter and not natural … Continue reading

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

Inequitable Conduct in Canada – Disarming the “Atomic Bomb”

This is a guest post from Brian W. Gray of Norton Rose. This week a significant decision for patent owners was released from our Canadian Federal Court of Appeal. A copy of the case is found at the end of … Continue reading

Posted in Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Patent Office Proposes New Materiality Rules

On July 21st,  the Patent Office published a notice of proposed rulemaking, in the wake of the Therasense decision (a copy is found at the end of this post), awkwardly entitled “Revision of the Materiality to Patentability Standard for the … Continue reading

Posted in Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment