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: 1-10 of 630

Having A Bad Hair Day? The Federal Circuit Agrees That Method Of Cutting Hair Is Invalid Under 101
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2016

While I do not usually write about non-precedential decisions, In re: Brown caught my eye as an interesting patent eligibility case. It does not


Will The Celsis Appeal Put An End To 101 Rejections Of Laboratory Method Claims?
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2016

On April 5, 2016, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in Rapid Litigation Mgmt. Ltd. v. CellzDirect Inc., where the U.S. District Court for the


Can Foreign Sales Infringe U.S. Patents?
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 21 2016

It is a deceptively simple question with a not so simple answer. A purely foreign transaction is certainly beyond the reach of U.S. patent law, but


Jazz Xyrem Valproate Patent Claims Avoid IPR
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 18 2016

The USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decided not to institute inter partes review (IPR) of key claims of Jazz's U.S. Patent 8,772,306


Court Can't Review Policy Behind Patent Term Adjustment Statute
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2016

In Singhal v. Lee, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed a complaint that challenged the Patent Term Adjustment


Methods Exploiting Junk DNA May Be Useful But Lack Patent Eligibility
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 11 2016

Striking another blow against patent eligibility in the field of biotechnology, the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that methods that


Another diagnostic patent falls under 101
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 10 2016

In Genetic Techs Ltd v Merial LLC (Fed. Cir., April 8, 2016), the Federal Circuit invalidated yet another diagnostic patent for failing to satisfy 35


Amgen Hedges Its Bets With Cross-Petition For Certiorari Of Biosimilar Decision
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 7 2016

Although Amgen originally did not petition the Supreme Court for certiorari to review the first Federal Circuit decision interpreting the BPCIA


Guarding Against Conclusory Statements & Why It Matters Even More Under The New PTAB Rules
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 7 2016

A common deficiency highlighted in recent PTAB decisions denying institution of an IPR petition is that an expert declaration offers only


What "Reasonably" Could Have Been Raised in an Inter Partes Review?
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 6 2016

Since their introduction, inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings have had a close association with district court litigation. Indeed, litigation