Blog

We have an exciting and busy month ahead of us as several members of Dilworth IP’s team prepare to give presentations through various means during March. Mike Dilworth and Rosemary Miano will be speaking at the BioPlastics Convention in Las Vegas on March 6th, Dr. Anthony Sabatelli will moderate a panel of experts discussing the Myriad decision at Yale’s School of Medicine on March 25th, and Dr. Jon Schuchardt will host a webinar presentation for scientists on writing Effective Invention Disclosures on March 27th.

Last year, we reviewed the 2012 patents in the area of Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) specifically related to the FCC process. The original intent, of course, had been to also summarize the 2012 patents for FCC catalysts and equipment. Unfortunately, that goal met the same fate as several of my New Year’s resolutions. A year’s passage, however, has brought sufficient wisdom not only to grasp the trend in my New Year’s resolutions, but to realize I now have two-year’s patents to review in those areas.

The numbers are in for 2013. During the past year the US Food and Drug Administration approved 27 new drugs. This compares with a record 39 approvals for 2012 and 30 for 2011. But what does this mean? What’s in store for 2014?

Michael Dilworth and Rosemary Miano of Dilworth IP are pleased to be speaking at this year’s Bioplastics Conference at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas on March 6, 2014. Their talk, Strategic Considerations Amid the Changing Patent Landscape for the BioPlastics Industry, will address some of the challenges and opportunities for patent protection in this very promising technology area. Billed as the Reinvention of Plastics, the conference is the largest gathering of industry professionals focused exclusively within the field of bioplastics.

For more information about the event, visit: http://www.bioplastconference.com/index.htm

Federal Circuit Decision will not Interfere with Interference
On November 5, 2013 the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit handed down a decision in Sanofi-Aventis v. Pfizer Inc., 108 USPQ2d 1741. The decision is of interest because it had the potential to directly deal with the question of the patentability of biomolecules such as DNA and drug targets. However, the Court prudently exercised restraint in not doing so.

Are diagnostic claims now at risk?

On October 30, 2013 the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued an Order holding that medical diagnostic method claims are not eligible for patent protection. See Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., Case No. C 11-06391 SI. This District Court Order is significant because it was made upon remand and direction from the Federal Circuit to examine the subject matter eligibility of diagnostic patent claims in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.,133 S. Ct. 2107 (2013). However, the District Court decision is also potentially concerning because it raises the specter of whether lower courts will now feel compelled to issue rulings on important patent questions that are still evolving at the Supreme Court level. Some might even argue that these patent questions deal with important public policy issues that should more appropriately be addressed by the legislative branch and the US Patent and Trademark Office.

On September 24, 2013, the world’s five largest Intellectual Property Offices, the so called IP5: the USPTO, the Japan Patent Office, the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China, the Korean Intellectual Property Office, and the European Patent Office, agreed to launch an IP5 Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) pilot program in January 2014. This is just the latest example of the increasing popularity of PPH-type programs already in use in the United States and around the world. In view of the support these programs enjoy, both at the USPTO and foreign Offices, it’s likely they are here to stay. This is a very positive development for companies that file patents, since review of a company’s global filing strategy with an eye toward making use of the patent prosecution highway could yield big benefits.

Dilworth IP is very excited to announce the newest member of our team, Dr. Anthony Sabatelli. Dr. Sabatelli comes to us with a wealth of experience in the Biotech and Pharmaceutical industries with over twenty years of industry experience focused primarily in the biotechnology, pharmaceutical, chemical, material science, and consumer products industries. He holds a Ph.D. in organic chemistry from Yale University and a law degree from Salmon P. Chase College of Law.

Dilworth IP’s Jon Schuchardt will be a presenter at the upcoming Strafford webinar: “Obviousness Standard After the AIA: Leveraging Latest PTO and Court Guidance.” The live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A starts at 1:00 p.m. EST on Thursday, November 14th. Convergence of the AIA, the Supreme Court’s KSR v. Teleflex decision, the USPTO’s post-KSR guidelines, and recent Federal Circuit rulings have created a rapidly evolving obviousness standard that is more confusing than ever.

Dilworth IP’s half-day symposium at NERM 2013 is just two weeks away! The Firm has been invited to organize the event for the Northeast Regional Meeting (NERM) of the American Chemical Society at the Omni Hotel in New Haven on October 23rd. We are very excited to be a part of this large gathering of scientists and engineers.

Our speakers, accomplished IP practitioners with diverse experience and backgrounds including industry, academia, and private practice, will be presenting eight short talks on Intellectual Property Fundamentals: What Everyone in R&D Must Know. These talks include such topics as How to Read a Patent, Aligning Your IP Strategy with Your Business Strategy, and Copyright Issues to Consider When Publishing. The symposium will be a great source of practical IP knowledge for business managers, scientists, or anyone involved in research and development.