Tag Archives: Patent Law

Review of Indian Working Requirements

This newsletter (attached below) from a leading Indian firm, contains a good review of the perils of the working requirement in India. It also provides a good summary of three recent decisions holding pharma patents invalid for obviousness. What is striking is … Continue reading

Posted in Int'l Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hamilton Beach v. Sunbeam Products – “On Sale” Bar Clarified

On Wednesday August 14th, a divided  Fed. Cir. panel affirmed the invalidation of Hamilton Beach’s portable slow cooker under the “on-sale” or “in public use” bars of s. 102(b). Hamilton Beach Brands v. Sunbeam Prods., Inc., Appeal No. 2012-1581 (Fed. … Continue reading

Posted in 102 Patentability | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Evidentiary, My Dear Watson; Biosig, Instruments v. Nautilus, Inc.

This is a guest post from Ronald Schutz of Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi. In Biosig, Instruments v. Nautilus, Inc., a unanimous panel of the Federal Circuit had little trouble deducing the definiteness of the patent at issue despite a … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Interpretation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Complimentary Webinar: Patenting DNA

Join Robin Chadwick and me as we untangle the web of rulings in the upcoming webinar “Patenting DNA: Why DNA is Different and What to Do About It.”  The live CLE webinar will be presented on Wednesday, August 7th at … Continue reading

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