Tag Archives: USPTO

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

Athena v. Mayo Part II – Iancu v. The Federal Circuit(?)

Posted on February 7, 2019 by Warren Woessner

The 2019 Revised Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance published on January 7th purported to revise the procedures for determining whether a patent claim or patent application claim is “directed to a judicial exception (laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas) … Continue reading →

Posted in USPTO Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

USTPO Releases Proposed Revised Section 101 Eligibility Guidelines

Posted on January 7, 2019 by Warren Woessner

On January 7th, the Patent Office released proposed revised s. 101 eligibility examination guidelines for public comment. The proposed Guidelines would supersede MPEP 2016.04(II), the section that controls the analysis conducted at step 2A of the Mayo/Alice test  “to the … 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