James Monroe and Lawrence Ilag of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP analyse the impact of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision In re Kubin.
Four years ago, the Federal Circuit held in In re Kubin, 561 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2009) that the claimed polynucleotide (DNA) sequences in that case were obvious, although the prior art did not disclose or suggest what the claimed sequences would look like. In effect, the Federal Circuit found the sequences obvious because the prior art disclosed sufficient information to make isolating and characterising the claimed DNA sequences a rather straightforward project.
We explore in this report how the Kubin decision has informed the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) standard in determining obviousness of DNA fragments. In particular, we describe and analyse here the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) recent adjudications in appeals arising from obviousness rejections of polynucleotide claims. We then reflect on how DNA patent applications may be made more robust given this legal landscape.
In Ex parte Levinson, 2013 Pat. App. LEXIS 923 (PTAB Mar. 1, 2013), the invention related to compositions generating an immune response that did not target IgE sitting on mast cells and therefore avoided potentially deleterious mast cell release reactions.
To continue reading this article and to access our full archive, digital magazines and special reports you will need a subscription.
If you have already subscribed please login.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription we can add you into, please email Atif at email@example.com
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
For access to the complete website and archive choose '12 MONTH SUBSCRIPTION'. For a free, two-week trial select ‘TWO WEEK FREE TRIAL’.
Kubin, obviousness, DNA sequences, Hadwiger, Arnold