Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 
Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
-
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner
Pages
Archives
Tag Archives: patent attorney
Time For Myriad To Fight Another Day
Put another way, it is time for Jones Day to click their well-polished heels and go home. Today, the U.S. Government filed an amicus brief largely supporting the arguments by AMP/ACLU that isolated DNA is essentially the same molecule after … Continue reading
Supreme Court to Review Monsanto v. Bowman
On Friday, Oct 5th, the Supreme Court granted cert. to review the Fed. Cir.’s decision in Monsanto Co. v. Bowman, App. no. 2010-1068 (Fed. Cir. September 21, 2011). (A copy of the decision is at the end of this post.) … Continue reading
Posted in Ag Biotechnology, Exhaustion of Rights
Tagged biotechnology, biotechnology law, biotechnology news, corn, Federal Circuit, intellectual property, ip, Monsanto Tech Agreement, Monstanto v Bowman, patent attorney, Patent Law, patent strategy, seeds, Supreme Court, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
Federal Circuit Knocks Outside the Box’s Inequitable Conduct Charges Out of the Box
The following is a guest post from Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner’s associate Ricardo Moran. The issues on appeal were whether Travel Caddy, Inc. had committed inequitable conduct for: (i) not disclosing the existence of the litigation on U.S. Patent No. … Continue reading
Lilly Files Amicus Brief in Myriad Remand – With Friends Like This…
Following its reversal of the Fed. Cir.’s decision in Mayo v. Prometheus (“Mayo”), the Supreme Court GVR’d in response to AMP’s (read: ACLU’s) appeal of Myriad’s claims to isolated DNA sequences and to a method of screening potential anti-cancer drugs … Continue reading