The patent eligibility of bioprinted products and processes has not been squarely addressed by the legislature or tested in courts. Arlene Chow and Nitya Anand explain what could be done in the future in this article, first published in issue #35 of IPPro Patents. The medical industry is undergoing a radical transformation, thanks to recent
In June, three democratic senators (Chris Coons from Delaware, Dick Durbin from Illinois, and Mazie Hirono from Hawaii) and one republican senator (Tom Cotton from Arkansas) introduced the “STRONGER Patents Act of 2017.” One of the motivations for the bill appears to be that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently ranked the U.S. patent system
Our New York-based partner Arlene Chow talks about the emergence of 3-D bioprinting and the ability of innovators in this space to patent organ and tissue printing technology. “There is a tension between phenomenal innovation and the ability for scientists to adequately protect their innovations,” Chow explained. “The whole point of patents is to encourage
Most energy companies implement Intellectual Property (“IP”) strategies to protect and exploit company IP (offense) and navigate third-party rights (defense). Traditionally, these policies emphasize patents. But today’s IP-savvy energy companies strategically manage both patent and trade secret portfolios throughout a company’s particular energy sector focus. The ascendance of trade secrets reflects recent strengthening of U.S.
The America Invents Act (AIA) became law roughly five years ago, and with its implementation came new administrative proceedings by which companies may challenge the validity of patents at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Rather than establishing a single uniform procedure that permits challenges to any patent based on any statutory ground, however, Congress
A recent district court case, Helsinn Healthcare v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs., et al. (D.N.J. 2016), marks the first judicial interpretation of the America Invents Act of 2011 (“AIA”) on-sale bar standard for “secret” sales and “secret” offers-for-sale, bidding farewell to arguments that confidential sales and offers-for-sale preclude patentability. Before 2011, Section 102(b) of the Patent
On January 15, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to review whether the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has been using the correct standard to construe patent claims in post-grant proceedings. The PTAB construes claims according to their “broadest reasonable interpretation” (“BRI”). By contrast, the claim construction standard applied by district courts follows Federal
Recent USPTO activity may signal a shift in treatment of pharmaceutical patents in AIA proceedings. The America Invents Act (“AIA”) provides for adversarial proceedings for challenging patents in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) — including inter partes review (“IPR”) and post grant review (“PGR”) — which are faster, cheaper, and have a lower