Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-10 of 43
Hatch-Waxman does not provide statutory basis to require amendment of FDA use code
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- May 31 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently reversed and vacated a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan granting summary judgment and ordering a mandatory injunction requiring a pioneer drug manufacturer to amend its “use code” with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA
Board reverses examiner’s favorable reexamination decision on patentability of human stem cell claims
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- May 31 2010
On appeal in the inter partes reexamination for U.S. Patent No 7,029,913 (the ’913 patent), the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Board) found that a patent on human embryonic stem cells was invalid as anticipated by an earlier patent and obvious in light of the “significant guideposts” in the literature for deriving the cells at the time of invention
District court strikes down gene patents and methods of using genes as unpatentable subject matter
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 28 2010
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in the closely watched case Association for Molecular Pathology, et al v. USPTO and Myriad, et al
Section 112 includes a separate written description requirement
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 28 2010
Sitting en banc, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a 9-2 decision, confirmed that 35 U.S.C. 112, 1 includes a written description requirement separate from the enablement requirement
D.C. Circuit rejects FDA’s interpretation of “failure to market” forfeiture provisions
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- March 31 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently rejected the interpretation of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the “failure to market” forfeiture provisions of the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act amendments (2003 MMA amendments) to the Hatch-Waxman Act
Medical emergency! But form not “original”
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- March 31 2010
Addressing a copyright dispute involving the copyrightability of medical forms, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a summary judgment ruling that the medical forms were not copyrightable because the selection and arrangement of well-known medical terms was not sufficiently original
District court strikes down gene patents and methods of using genes as unpatentable subject matter
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- March 30 2010
Judge Sweet held that products isolated from nature must possess "markedly different characteristics" from the product in nature to constitute patentable subject matter
Retroactive terminal disclaimer not allowed and safe harbor applies to divisional of divisional
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- February 28 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that a terminal disclaimer cannot be effective if it is filed after the expiration of the earlier patent
Judicial precedent trumps USPTO’s procedural rules for priority interferences; claim terms must be construed in light of the host specification
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- January 30 2010
In a patent interference involving the adequacy of an application's written description, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reminded both the district court and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) that judicial precedent always trumps the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) procedural rules
Contractual agreement trumps statutory scheme
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- January 30 2010
Addressing an intersection between patent and contract law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a lower court’s holding that defendant Xenon Pharmaceuticals (Xenon) breached a license agreement by failing to pay plaintiff Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) a share of the fees received for sub-licensing the jointly owned patent subject to the agreement
Current Search
- Jurisdiction - USA
- Workarea - Intellectual Property
- Workarea - Healthcare
- Firm Name - McDermott Will & Emery
Suggested Facets
Author
- Andrew Kumamoto (3)
- Astrid R. Spain (3)
- Jeremiah Armstrong (1)
- Jeremy T. Elman (1)
- Kristin Connarn (2)
- Leigh J. Martinson (1)
- Paul Devinsky (2)
- Philip C. Canelli (1)
- Sheila D. Walcoff (1)
- William Gaede (3)