Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> IPBiz
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: IPBizPatent Docs post on Kubin, for which oral argument is Jan. 8
By Lawrence B. Ebert, Esq.
The beginning of the post-->
The Federal Circuit will hear oral argument on Thursday for In re Kubin, a case having great significance for biotechnology patenting. At issue is the question of whether the existence in the prior art of a purified protein, combined with "routine" cloning methods, renders obvious a claim to a nucleic acid encoding the protein. This was the Patent Office position twelve years ago, which was rejected by the Federal Circuit in the In re Bell and In re Deuel decisions. But the Supreme Court's KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. decision emboldened the Patent Office to challenge the Federal Circuit on this issue. As a bonus, the Court will also be asked to opine on how the Office has interpreted its frequently-conflicting written description jurisprudence.
See also:
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2008/06/bio-brief-in-kubin-appeal.html
Full post as published by IPBiz on January 08, 2009 (boomark / email).
Washington Post WPO Securities Fraud
Washington Post WPO
Zantac Patent
GlaxoSmithKline and Cypress Pharmaceutical settle patent infringement dispute.
Washington Post 401(k) / ERISA Stock Fraud
Washington Post 401(k) / ERISA Stock Fraud
Soliris Patent
Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. agrees to pay the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation a $10 million patent infringement settlement.
DRAM Patent
ProMOS Technologies and Mosel Vitelic pay MOSAID Technologies an undisclosed patent infringement settlement.
Oral HRT
More Than Doubles the Risk of Blood Clots

Briefs for In re Kubin filed by Amgen and BIO
In re Kubin to Be Argued before the Federal Circuit on Thursday
Obvious to Try BIO Challenges Ex Parte Kubin
Ice oral argument transcript now available
Oral Argument in Arizona v. Johnson:







