Making sense of the newest Section 337 developments will be a key focus of The American Conference Institute’s 13th Annual Practitioners’ Think Tank on ITC Litigation and Enforcement.
Patent applicants with digital health inventions need to remember that being useful and novel may not be enough, warn Linda Thayer, Aaron Capron and Sneha Nyshadham of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner.
Changes to China’s patent laws and a filing by a Wuhan lab involving Gilead’s remdesivir have set up an interesting patent race, says Thomas Moga of Dykema.
The updated rules included important changes involving amino or nucleic acid sequences and antibodies, as Clare Roskell and Samantha Moodie of Mathys & Squire explain.
Amgen v Sanofi continues the Federal Circuit’s trend of undermining certain antibody claims, explains Benjamin Pelletier of Haynes and Boone.
The role of the doctrine of equivalents in assessing the value of, and risks associated with, medtech patents is often overlooked. Christopher Bright and Nathan Smith of Morgan Lewis report.
Is the grant of a reasonable scope for antibody-related inventions at the European Patent Office a phenomenon of the past? Joachim Wachenfeld and Florian Grasser of Vossius & Partner report.
As AI becomes a crucial weapon in the battle against the global pandemic, companies in the field need to ensure that their valuable IP is protected, as Mao Xiao Hong and Danny Yap of IPOS International explain.
As the UK Supreme Court reverses a Court of Appeal decision relating to sufficiency, the ruling leaves patent applicants in a potentially difficult position, argues David Fyfield of Charles Russell Speechlys.
The EPO’s May 2020 decision in G3/19, on the patentability of certain plants, was among the most controversial in the office’s history. Anna Gregson of Mathys & Squire explores the implications.