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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-5 of 5

Biosimilars can sit out patent dance, but may have to wait out second exclusivity period
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 24 2015

In Amgen v. Sandoz, Fed. Cir., No. 15-1499 (July 21, 2015), a divided panel of the Federal Circuit issued its first decision interpreting the


Supreme Court holds isolated naturally occurring DNA cannot be patented, sustains patent-eligibility of cDNA
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • June 13 2013

While the Court's decision is not unexpected, it marks a significant change in the law, and reverses the decades-old USPTO practice of granting


Federal Circuit reaffirms patent eligibility of personalized medicine and diagnostic method claims
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • December 17 2010

Today, in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, No. 2008-1403 (Fed. Cir. 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed that personalized medicine and medical diagnostic claims are not per se unpatentable for claiming natural phenomena


Supreme Court grants certiorari in Prometheus v. Mayo (again)
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2011

On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court granted Mayo's petition for certiorari in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, 628 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010), a case addressing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 of certain method claims relevant to personalized medicine