We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 28

Who owns my invention?

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 18 2012

In a July 12, 2012 order, Suffolk Superior Court Justice Lauriat dismissed a lawsuit by urologist Dr. Grocela, asserting that his employer’s Intellectual Property (IP) policy as applied to him was an unfair restraint on trade since his employer, Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), claimed ownership of an invention that was not related to urology

Looking back: a review of IP events in 2010

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 26 2011

The start of a new year is always a time to reflect on the year that has passed before looking forward

WIPO world intellectual property indicators report indicates a global rebound in IP activity and continued growth in China

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • China, Global, USA
  • -
  • November 22 2010

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recently published its second annual World Intellectual Property Indicators report, providing an in-depth look at worldwide trends in intellectual property (IP) activity

Supreme Court Justice Kagan's intellectual property record

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 17 2010

On August 7, 2010, Elena Kagan officially assumed office as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States

Green technologies given special treatment in the United States, United Kingdom, and South Korea

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • South Korea, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

Our January 2010 issue included a report about the USPTO's "Green Technology Pilot Program," which affords applicants the ability to petition to have an application "made special" if the application pertains to environmental quality, energy conservation, development of renewable energy resources, and greenhouse gas emission reduction

Federal Circuit confirms the written description requirement for patent applications

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

On March 22, 2010, the Federal Circuit handed down an en banc decision holding that the "written description" requirement for patent applications is distinct from the enablement requirement

Claims held invalid for failing to include the best mode within the specification

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

Although allegations of a patentee’s failure to disclose the best mode of a claimed invention rarely succeed in rendering asserted claims of a patent invalid, the Federal Circuit recently affirmed in Ajinomoto Co, Inc v International Trade Commission a determination of invalidity by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that should alert patent practitioners and inventors of the importance of disclosing the preferred mode of practicing an invention

Federal Circuit vacates earlier inequitable conduct holding to hear appeal en banc

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

The last issue of Nutter's IP Bulletin reported that a three judge panel of the Federal Circuit upheld a finding of inequitable conduct in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co

Ground-breaking federal district court ruling on gene patents

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

In Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. United States Patent And Trademark Office et al., Association for Molecular Pathology and other plaintiffs, including some physicians and cancer patients, asked a federal district court in New York, in a motion for summary judgment, to invalidate several so-called “gene patents” owned by the University of Utah and Myriad Genetics

BPAI clarifies standard of review for examiner’s rejections

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 17 2010

In its first precedential decision of 2010, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) decided in Ex Parte Frye that an Examiner's rejection is given no deference upon appellate review