Blog

Research into the human microbiome has resulted in such unprecedented amounts of data that challenges related to both interpretation and management have emerged. Somewhat paradoxically, current statistical methods have made it such that it is more difficult and less likely to identify statistically significant results from large data sets. We see much potential for the expansion of intellectual property protection in the area of big data related to the microbiome, not only as a result of recent research advances and the desire to better and more efficiently handle big data, but also because of several recent Federal Circuit decisions in intellectual property law that provide some promising guidance for protecting software and computing information that may be required for managing and interpreting microbiome-related data. Moreover, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has provided examples for crafting potentially patent eligible claims in this space, a promising step forward in what has become a difficult area for IP protection.

In late December, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a series of subject matter eligibility examples meant to provide guidance for drafting claims pertaining to business methods. This is the first time that the USPTO has issued guidance on such matters. The examples, labeled 34, 35, and 36, serve to clarify the validity of claims pertaining to abstract matters under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and focus on a system for filtering internet content, verifying a bank customer’s identity to permit an ATM transaction, and tracking inventory, respectively. Interestingly, while the fact patterns and claims of 35 and 36 are hypothetical, example 34 is taken directly from BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC where the claims were ruled eligible by the Federal Circuit in 2016. BASCOM has played an important role in the changing landscape of software-related patents.

Back in December, the Supreme Court accepted a petition in the case of TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, one of the few patent-centric cases recently taken up by the Court. Interestingly, for this review, the case does not focus on the claims or scope of a particular patent, but instead on a fundamental question in patent litigation: that of venue. The implications for this case are vast. Currently, the Eastern District of Texas is a desired district for litigating patent cases. Should the Supreme Court overturn the Federal Circuit’s ruling on patent venues, which states that patentees can bring suit in a district even if they do not have a business presence in that district, the redistribution of patent litigation could be both swift and unpredictable.

Dr. Anthony Sabatelli and Nicholas Vincent of Dilworth IP will be offering a FREE webinar on Wednesday, February 22nd at 2:00 PM (EST). This installment in the Dilworth IP Webinar Series is entitled Patenting the Microbiome: Trends, Challenges, and Insights, and will offer an overview of the microbiome; specifically, the IP challenges that it presents, and recommendations for a robust path forward. Research in the microbiome seeks to characterize the microorganism that live in and on different environments, including the human body. Recent developments in this area are revolutionizing the life sciences, because they have the potential to radically improve treatments for dozens of common ailments and greatly improve the quality of life for many who suffer from these conditions. Despite the promise and excitement of this important research area, the IP aspects are challenging. For example, the threshold question of patent subject matter eligibility under 35 USC 101 is still a confusing and uncertain issue in this area.

This webinar is a must attend for patent practitioners, inventors, business leaders, research directors, and others in the life sciences industry seeking perspective and clarity on the IP challenges around the microbiome.

Dilworth IP is pleased to announce that Tom DeFelice, the Firm’s Director of Client Development and Operations, has earned the professional designation of Certified Legal Manager (CLM) from the Association of Legal Administrators (ALA). The CLM certification is reserved for those individuals who have demonstrated a mastery in essential aspects of legal management, including financial management, human resources, operations and processes, and legal industry and business management. With fewer than 450 CLMs currently worldwide, Mr. DeFelice’s certification represents Dilworth IP’s dedication to excellence. Dilworth IP Founder and Managing Partner, Michael Dilworth commented, “this is a great achievement for both Tom and for the Firm. Knowing that we have someone with Tom’s experience and credentials overseeing the Firm’s operations and management feels great and is a sign of the Firm’s commitment to serving our clients well.”

For more information about the ALA’s Certified Legal Manager certification, Click Here.

For as long as there have been FCC’s, refiners have had to manage catalyst additions and losses. If the catalyst additions were the same as the losses then catalyst inventory would be maintained. If catalyst losses were greater than additions, then purchased ECAT would have to be added. If additions were greater than losses, then ECAT would need to be withdrawn from the unit. Withdrawn catalyst is sometimes transferred to brokers who then sell it to refiners needing ECAT for their units, otherwise it is disposed of, e.g., sold into cement manufacturing applications. The following three patents demonstrate attempts to upgrade the value of ECAT. The first treats ECAT to convert it to a metals trap, the second and third adjust the ECAT particle size distribution. It will be interesting to see whether this trend in ECAT-related inventions continues.

Dr. Jonathan Schuchardt, Partner at Dilworth IP, will be presenting a series of talks on the basics of patent law for the Bioscience Center, an incubator, accelerator and centralized resource center for biotechnology in New Mexico. The first talk, Patent Mythology: Common Misconceptions about Patents, will be held on Tuesday, January 10th; the second, Effective Invention Disclosures, on Tuesday, January 24th; and the third, How to Read a Patent, will be held on Tuesday, February 7th. The entire series will take place at FatPipe ABQ in Albuquerque, NM from 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM (MST), and will be open to the public.

Dr. Anthony Sabatelli, Partner and Chair of Dilworth IP’s Biotech and Pharmaceutical IP practice group, has been appointed to serve on CURE’s Board of Directors. CURE (Connecticut United for Research Excellence) serves as the bioscience cluster for the state, and is a diverse community of small and large life and healthcare sciences companies, ranging in scope from therapeutics, to healthcare technology, to medical devices. Universities, government agencies, scientists, educators, mentors, students, entrepreneurs, business experts, service providers and investors further form the breadth of the network. Regarding his appointment, Dr. Sabatelli said that “I am honored to serve CURE in this capacity because it is an important advocate for the state’s bioscience community.”

Dilworth IP was recently selected to organize a two-day symposium on trademark and brand protection for a group of fourteen delegates from the Trademark Division of the State Administration for Industry & Commerce (SAIC) of the People’s Republic of China. Michael Dilworth, founder of Dilworth IP, moderated the event with assistance from the firm’s Technology Specialist, Jing Zhou. Frederick Spaeth, who chairs the firm’s trademark practice, contributed a presentation on US trademark law and best practices. Other speakers included Paul Pita of The Pita Group, Harry Falber of Trade Area Marketing Group and Paul Edelberg of Fox Rothschild LLP. Dr. Shenmin Yin of Beyond Attorneys at Law served as the Chinese translator for the event, and Lora Feng and Ting Yi of LFI Solutions served as co-organizers.

This is an article in a review of patents issued in 2016 in the area of Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC). The summary below covers a single patent relating to FCC catalyst additives; specifically a gasoline sulfur reduction additive. Last year, when we were reviewing catalyst additive patents for 2015, there were only five: two related to gasoline sulfur reduction catalysts; two related to metals deactivators/traps; and a ZSM-5 additive patent. At that time, because of the low numbers of patents it was an open question whether there would be a resurgence in these areas. The answer appears to be that FCC research in additives, at least that for which IP protection is being sought, continues to be low. Research seems to be shifting more to processes and equipment, and maintaining a position in catalysts. All of these will be covered in forthcoming articles.