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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 24

ERISA preemption on the run San Francisco's health ordinance

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 23 2008

This month the ability of employers to rely on ERISA preemption to implement a uniform health program was again called into question

TTAB rules that fraud in less than all classes does not warrant cancellation of multi-class registration in toto

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 11 2009

On January 29, 2009, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office answered a significant open question in the post-Medinol era, namely, whether a finding of fraud with regard to fewer than all International Classes in a multi-Class trademark registration requires cancellation of the entire registration or whether cancellation will be limited to all goodsservices in the Class in which fraud is found

In re Kubin another hurdle for DNA sequence patents

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 7 2009

A typical scenario in the development of biotech patents claiming DNA sequences: a bench researcher discovers the isolation and characterization of a protein that may have desirable biological activity and publishes a paper describing the results

Medical treatment and diagnostic claims are patentable

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 18 2009

The Federal Circuit has calmed some anxiety over the patentability of medical diagnostic methods under 35 U.S.C. 101 with its decision in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, holding that some method of treatment and diagnostic methods are indeed patentable subject matter

Patentability of medical method patents after Bilski

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 12 2010

The Supreme Court's rejection in Bilski of the machine-or-transformation test as the sole test for determining patentability of a process has generated discussion in the medical device field as to the patentability of method patents, particularly in regard to diagnostic methods and methods of treatment

Federal Circuit's en banc decision delineates and defines a written description requirement

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 24 2010

On March 22, the Federal Circuit issued its 9-2 en banc decision in Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co., affirming 112, 1 contains a written description requirement that is separate and distinct from the enablement requirement

Separate written description? Oral arguments in en banc rehearing of Ariad v. Lilly

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 8 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments on December 7 in its en banc rehearing of Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., Fed. Cir., No. 2008-1248

Drafting biotechnology process claims in light of Bilski

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 8 2010

Should biotechnology process claims be drafted differently in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Kappos?

Reversal based on obviousness potentially impacts patent rights of stem cell technology

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 11 2010

In a decision potentially affecting the ability of biotechnology companies and research institutions to obtain and maintain patent rights concerning stem cell technology, the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“BPAI”) recently rejected the claims of U.S. Patent Number 7,029,913 (the “‘913 Patent”) directed to human embryonic stem cell lines

Federal circuit applies ariad analysis to dna and protein claims in interference

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 21 2010

The written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112 can play a critical role in interferences as well as patent prosecution and litigation