On November 1, Meredith Addy of AddyHart P.C. and I submitted an Amici Curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Freenome Holdings and New Cures for Cancers in support of the Petition for Certiorari in Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo Collaborative Services. If the Supreme Court does not take this case, it is unlikely to reconsider its decisions on Section 101 of the U.S. patent law. This may be our last gasp judicial effort. The Supreme Court takes cases raising inconsistencies in the law or a circuit split. We knew parties/amici would focus on the Federal Circuit’s “internal circuit split,” so we took a different approach and urged the Court to resolve five critical inconsistencies in the law, summarized below.
- Perryman PTAB Study for Unified Patents Leaves Out Half of the Story
- Patents are from Mars, Trade Secrets are From Venus
- The Rise of Australia’s Small Boutique Patent and Trademark Firms
- Tech Companies Should Strongly Consider Monetizing Their Patent Portfolios During the Economic Downturn
- (Not) Copyright Infringement: Is dbrand Infringing Nintendo’s IP?
- The Re-Written American Axle Opinion Does Not Bring Peace of Mind for Section 101 Stakeholders
- Federal Circuit Clarifies That Standard-Essentiality is A Question for the Factfinder
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, August 7: USPTO Increases Fees for Patent Filings and AIA Trials, State AGs Ask HHS to March-In on Remdesivir, CAFC Denies American Axle Rehearing
- No, You Can’t March in On Remdesivir
- Google v. Oracle Perspective: Google’s Android ‘Cheat Code’ was to Copy Oracle’s Code