1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5

CPLRG™ 0006 - Iovate Health Sciences, Inc. v. Bio-Engineered Supplements & Nutrition, Inc. - Nov. 19, 2009

586 F.3d 1376, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 25388 (Fed. Cir. 2009)

iovatehealthfc

MAJOR ISSUES: Anticipation–lack of novelty
Printed publication more than a year before patent application filing–Section 102(b)
Advertisement in a trade magazine
Enablement

Read CPLRG™ 0006

CPLRG™ 0003 - Board of Trustees of The Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. - Sep. 30, 2009

Board of Trustees of The Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 583 F.3d at 832, CPLRG 0003 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (LINN, Prost & Moore), aff’d, 131 S. Ct. 502 (2011) stanfordroche093020091

MAJOR ISSUES: Standing–Ownership Counterclaim by Accused Infringer–State Statute of Limitations
Assignment Agreement–Assignment of Present Interest in Future Inventions–Equitable Title–Earlier Agreement to Assign Right in the Future–Bona Fide Purchaser–Bayh-Dole Act

Update:  On June 6, 2011, the Supreme Court affirmed this decision.  See CPLRG 0070.

Read CPLRG™ 0003

CPLRG™ 0002 - Advanced Software Design Corp. v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis - Sep. 30, 2009

Advanced Software Design Corp. v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 583 F.3d 1371, CPLRG 0002 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (NEWMAN, Prost & Moore) advancedsoftware09302009

MAJOR ISSUES: United States Government–Use for the Government with its “Authorization or Consent.”

Read CPLRG™ 0002

CPLRG™ 0004 - Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. - Sep. 25, 2009

583 F.3d 1317, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 21166 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (DYK & Mayer; GAJARSA, dissenting)

janssenteva09252009

MAJOR ISSUES: Utility–Enablement–Method of Treating Disease

Read CPLRG™ 0004

CPLRG™ 0005 - AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. - Sep. 25, 2009

AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 583 F.3d 766, CPLRG 0005 (Fed. Cir. 2009) astrazenecateva09252009

MAJOR ISSUES: inequitable conduct, no intent to deceive, disclosure of comparative data as requested by examiner to overcome obviousness rejection, failure to disclose internal data on other related compounds, failure to synthesize compounds for comparative testing

Read CPLRG™ 0005

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5

©2010 Donald S. Chisum - All Rights Reserved

Website design by Bluegrass Internet Services