Wednesday, February 11, 2015
January
The Kosher Goldfish did not post in January because of a broken vertebrae. Hopefully a new post will be forthcoming in February.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Gene Patents Fall Again
Hot on the heels of the Myriad decision by the Supreme Court, several companies started performing the tests which Myriad claimed were proprietary, patented processes.
In short order Myriad sued several of them, including Ambry Genetics.
The trial court in the case of Myriad against Ambry held the patents invalid.
Myriad appealed that decision to the high patent court, the Court of Appeals For the Federal Circuit.
Here is the decision of the high patent court slapping down Myriad again.
This is a wonderful turn of events. For more information, see the previous post
In short order Myriad sued several of them, including Ambry Genetics.
The trial court in the case of Myriad against Ambry held the patents invalid.
Myriad appealed that decision to the high patent court, the Court of Appeals For the Federal Circuit.
Here is the decision of the high patent court slapping down Myriad again.
This is a wonderful turn of events. For more information, see the previous post
The Empire Loses Again
Today in “Myriad II”, or "The Empire Strikes Back" about the BRCA1- and BRCA2-based Breast Cancer Test Patent Litigation, __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2014)(Dyk, J.), the panel unanimously affirmed trial court conclusions of invalidity on the basis of lack of patent eligibility under 35 USC § 101.
This is an appeal from the District Court case we reported earlier.
I am startled, but gratified, by this unexpected outcome.
This is an appeal from the District Court case we reported earlier.
I am startled, but gratified, by this unexpected outcome.
Monday, November 3, 2014
CW v WARF - At Scotus Today
CW v WARF was at the US Supreme Court today.
Consumer Watchdog v. WARF – Standing: Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, Supreme Court No. _____, proceedings below,753 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2014)(Rader, J.), the patent challenger-petitioner questions the appellate court’s dismissal of its patentability challenge on the basis of lack of standing, relying upon,inter alia, NLRG v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 221 (1978); andPublic Citizen v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 440 U.S. 440, 449 (1989), neither of which had been considered by the appellate panel.
Below are links to the oral arguments in the Watchdog v WARF case.
To remind you:
What is at stake here is patents on embryonic stem cells, clearly a hot topic. This case is a procedural issue whether under the new patent law (America Invents Act, the AIA) allows a non-profit to sue in a post-issue grant. This post-issue grant, created under the AIA, is a patent which has been granted.
It's wait and see time again.
Consumer Watchdog v. WARF – Standing: Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, Supreme Court No. _____, proceedings below,753 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2014)(Rader, J.), the patent challenger-petitioner questions the appellate court’s dismissal of its patentability challenge on the basis of lack of standing, relying upon,inter alia, NLRG v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 221 (1978); andPublic Citizen v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 440 U.S. 440, 449 (1989), neither of which had been considered by the appellate panel.
Below are links to the oral arguments in the Watchdog v WARF case.
To remind you:
The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) has obtained a patent on Human Embryonic Stem Cells, USPN 7,029,913. The validity of the patent is opposed by the Consumer Watchdog (formerly known as the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights), a non-profit located in California with an office in D.C. Click on the links below to listen.
|
| |||
It's wait and see time again.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Dolly Appeal
Dolly petition to the Supreme Court is now due in November.
They have 90 days from 8/12/14, or until November 10, 2014
From the CAFC docket:
They have 90 days from 8/12/14, or until November 10, 2014
From the CAFC docket:
| 08/12/2014 | 40 | ORDER filed denying [36] petition for en banc rehearing filed by Roslin Institute (Edinburgh). By: En Banc (Per Curiam). Service as of this date by Clerk of Court. [174437] |
Curiouser and curioser
Latest on Dolly the sheep case:
An email exchange:
Dear Arthur,
Thank you for your enquiry. The Roslin Institute is not involved in this case or its appeals, although we understand that we have been named (wrongly) in the case.
We no longer undertake cloning work of the kind that created Dolly the sheep, although we do have an ongoing transgenic animal research programme whereby we are developing methods to genetically engineer farm animals, including sheep, pigs and chickens for a range of purposes.
Best wishes,
Nicola
Dr Nicola Stock
Public Engagement Officer
The Roslin Institute
University of Edinburgh
Easter Bush, Midlothian, EH25 9RG
0131 651 9100
nicola.stock@roslin.ed.ac.uk
www.roslin.ed.ac.uk
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Gershman [mailto:art.gershman@verizon.net]
Sent: 01 September 2014 21:29
To: STOCK Nicola
Subject: Dolly
Dear Dr. Stock,
Could you please tell me if the Institute is petitioning the US Supreme Court in the Dolly case?
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Arthur Gershman
RN 27,035 (USPTO)
According to court papers, the real party in interest in the case is:
Viagen
which is owned by:
Trans Ova Genetics
Keep tuned for more details
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)