Tag Archives: Biotech Patent

BIO Submits Joint Supplemental Comments on the USPTO March Guidance

Supreme Court

Last week BIO, alongside a number of member companies and private individuals, submitted supplemental comments to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office concerning their March 2014 Guidance on patent subject matter eligibility. In July, BIO and international bio-industry associations had submitted comments to the USPTO expressing concern about the Guidance, and its impact on the patent eligibility of biotechnology inventions. Since July, USPTO staff has indicated a final revision to the Guidance would be released Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Patent Cases Down by 40% in 2014

Patent-Case-Filings-by-Month-2011-20141

The number of new patent cases filed in federal court has dropped by an astonishing 40 percent as compared to this time last year. This trend has some questioning whether Congressional patent reform is even necessary. Some legal experts are attributing this drop to the fallout from the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Alice vs. CLS Bank decision. In June, SCOTUS ruled in the case of Alice that certain subject matter which had been patentable (a computer-implemented Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Should the USPTO Allow the Patenting of Living Organisms?

US PTO

Last year, a question was submitted to the GMO advocacy website GMOAnswers about whether or not the USPTO should allow the patenting of living organisms. Under 35 U.S.C. 101, “the laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas have been held not patentable.” Therefore the USPTO cannot and does not award patents on living organisms that were merely discovered in nature. However, the U.S. Supreme Court Ruled in Diamond v. Chakrabarty that a “nonnaturally occurring Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Detailed Report Examines the Crucial Role of Patents in Genetic Testing

shutterstock_27291016

In The Critical Role of Patents in the Development, Commercialization, and Utilization of Innovative Genetic Diagnostic Tests, Professor Holman argues that advocates for weakening patent protection have fundamental misconceptions on the role of patents in genetic testing. Opponents assume that patents negatively impact patient access to genetic diagnostic testing. They believe that patents inhibit research that could lead to new or improved versions of genetic tests, and that patent holders charge higher prices as exclusive Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What OxyContin Tells Us About the Value of “Evergreening” and Patents

Be.Futureproof

A few weeks ago, the  FDA announced that they would not allow generic versions of older versions of OxyContin. The original formulation of OxyContin goes off patent today. The original formulation did not have “tamper-resistant qualities” that prevent people from “crushing, breaking, and dissolution using a variety of tools and solvents.”  The article reports that the decision will keep Teva Pharmaceuticals and Impax Laboratories from making the older version which the FDA has determined is too dangerous Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , ,