Tag Archives: Mayo

Hikma and West-Ward v. Vanda – Are Methods of Medical Treatment Patent-Eligible?

Posted on March 5, 2019 by Warren Woessner

Hikma Pharms. and West-Ward Pharms petition for cert. to reverse the Fed. Cir.’s decision in Vanda v. West-Ward that methods of medical treatment are patentable. The Supreme Court’s now-infamous Mayo decision, invalidated claims to a method for determining the optimal … Continue reading →

Posted in 2017 Patent Review | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Knowles and Prosser Posit that the Expansion of s. 101 by the Supreme Court is Unconstitutional

Posted on January 17, 2019 by Warren Woessner

Sherry Knowles (Knowles Intellectual Strategies, LLC) and Anthony Prosser, one of Knowles’ agents have written an engrossing article (18 J. Marshall Rev; Intell. Prop. L. 144 (2018) arguing that the Supreme Court has meandered so far from the statutory language of … Continue reading →

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

Life Science Patenting to Iancu – “We need help too!”

Posted on December 2, 2018 by Warren Woessner

In his remarks presented at the recent 10th Annual Patent Law & Policy Conference at Georgetown University Law School, USPTO Director Andrei Iancu outlined the analytical framework for the new, eagerly awaited, PTO Guidance on patent eligible subject matter. Although … Continue reading →

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

Federal Circuit Circumvents Mayo/Alice Rule in Vanda v. West-Ward

Posted on April 17, 2018 by Warren Woessner

After Cleveland Clinic, IP practitioners were left to speculate about the fate of claims directed to methods of medical treatment. These claims seemed next in line for extinction by the Mayo/Alice rule, which I will paraphrase: “If a patent claim … Continue reading →

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