Tag Archives: Patent Law

C.I.T. v. Hughes Comm. – Survival Guide for Software?

On November 3, 2014, in Cal. Inst. Of Tech. v. Hughes Communications., 2014 U.S.. Dist. LEXIS 156763 (C.D. Cal. 2014), Judge Mariana Pfaelzer penned the most thorough defense of software claims attacked under s. 101 that I have seen since … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Genetic Technologies v. Bristol Myers – 101 At Work

In the recent memorandum opinion, the court invalidated claim 1 of U.S. Pat. No. 5,612,179, owned by Genetic Technologies, Ltd., as “impermissibly [claiming] a natural phenomenon.” (Genetic Technologies, Ltd. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, C.A. No. 12-394-LPS (D. Delaware, Oct. 30, … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Section 101 at AIPLA

The increasingly intense conversation about patentable subject matter post-Mayo, Myriad and Alice got off to a slow start at the “Partnering for Patents” meeting held at the PTO on Wednesday. The meeting was a scattering of in-house PTO reports and … Continue reading

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

Partnering In Patents XXI Program At USPTO Oct 22nd

Since I am suffering from section 101 fatigue, tomorrow I will be speaking at this program on indefiniteness post-Nautilus. However, this meeting gets interesting earlier in the afternoon when Andrew Hirschfeld presents on “Updates on 101 training and Examiner Guidance” … Continue reading

Posted in Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment