Last week, the United States Supreme Court handed down its unanimous opinion in Already, LLC v. Nike (No. 11-982). The Court held that Nike’s issuance of a broad covenant not to sue on one of its trademarks extinguished Already’s standing to its counterclaim for invalidity of Nike’s trademark. While this case involved trademarks, not patents,
Today, Wed., Apr. 18, 2012, in Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219, the Supreme Court (Thomas) (Sotomayor and Breyer concur) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that permits new evidence in an appeal to a district court under Section 145 from an adverse Patent Office ruling on a patent application.
Continue Reading Patent Alert: Supreme Court rules district court hearing appeal from PTO may consider new evidence and make de novo fact finding (Kappos v. Hyatt)
Yesterday, Tues., Mar. 20, 2012, in Mayo Collaborative Svcs v. Prometheus Labs, No. 10-1150, the Supreme Court (Breyer) unanimously reversed the Federal Circuit and ruled that a claimed process for assessing proper drug dosage was unpatentable under Section 101 because it was broadly directed to simply applying a law of nature in otherwise conventional drug treatment procedures. This decision may significantly impact not only pharmaceuticals, but software or other technology that involve applying laws of nature or mathematical formulas.
Continue Reading Patent Alert: Supreme Court rules drug administration process unpatentable because it simply applied law of nature to otherwise conventional drug treatment procedures (Mayo v. Prometheus)