Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> IPBiz

Patent Law

: IPBiz

WARF smokes PubPat, FTCR in last two re-exams of stem cell patents

By Lawrence B. Ebert, Esq.

On 28 February 2008, IPBiz noted the factual and legal positions taken by the USPTO as to the '913 patent STRONGLY SUGGEST the challenges to the '780 and '806 patents will fail. On 11 March 2008, various groups announced the victory of WARF in the re-exams of the '780 and '806 patents. [Look at East Bay Times and AP

AP -- In rulings made public Tuesday [March 11], Federal examiners confirmed two patents for scientist James Thomson's work on isolating embryonic stem cells of primates and humans. The patent office last month upheld another patent stemming from the work, but that ruling can be appealed.

East Bay -- "The patent office has conducted a thoughtful and thorough review of all three patents and we applaud this final decision on our two most important base stem cell patents,'' Gulbrandsen said. "Dr. Thomson's groundbreaking work already has led to additional scientific breakthroughs and this latest ruling affirms that his pioneering discoveries are patentable inventions.''

The results reflect the barrenness of the poorly reasoned positions of FTCR (Simpson), PubPat (Ravicher), and their declarants
Loring and Trounson. The results also reveal not only the bias but also the disconnectedness of writer Eli Kintisch.

See Bias of Eli Kintisch shows in "Small Win for Wisconsin in Stem Cell Fight "

Kintisch article in Science challenged in Sept. 06 JPTOS

Looking back on the PubPat challenge to the WARF patents

PubPat, FTCR lose in inter partes re-exam of WARF stem cell patent

**Recall -->

Gadfly buzzing around big-name corporate patents
By Eli Kintisch, FT.com site
Published: Aug 29, 2005

In June, the US Patent and Trademark Office ruled that Pfizer's patent for Lipitor, a $12bn-a-year cholesterol drug, might be invalid. Did the pharmaceutical company "get punked by a non-profit?" asked Stephen Albainy-Jenei, a patent lawyer and blogger.
The decision was the latest in a string of successful initial rulings won by Dan Ravicher, a 30-year-old lawyer and crusader against those patents that he says are bad for the public. He has also used PTO procedures to shoot holes in patents held by Microsoft and Columbia University. Part vigilante, part gadfly, Mr Ravicher has quickly earned a reputation for being part of a new breed of patent lawyers, and one worth watching.

**One can only wonder how Kintisch will cover this loss by Ravicher.

Full post as published by IPBiz on March 11, 2008 (boomark / email).