Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Oral Arguments Scheduled in CRISPR Interferences

By Kevin E. Noonan — On July 18th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board scheduled back-to-back oral hearings interferences between ToolGen Inc. (Senior Party) and Junior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and The President and Fellows of Harvard College (collectively, "Broad," Interference No. 106,126) and Junior Party The Regents of the University …

Oral Arguments Scheduled in CRISPR Interferences Read More »

Oral Arguments Scheduled in CRISPR Interferences

By Kevin E. Noonan — On July 18th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board scheduled back-to-back oral hearings interferences between ToolGen Inc. (Senior Party) and Junior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and The President and Fellows of Harvard College (collectively, "Broad," Interference No. 106,126) and Junior Party The Regents of the University …

Oral Arguments Scheduled in CRISPR Interferences Read More »

Tell Us What You Really Think: CVC Asserts Board Decision in ‘115 Interference Negates Jurisdiction in Interference Nos. 106,127 and 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — Captioned disarmingly as a Notice of Related Proceedings under 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a)(1) and ¶ 8.2 of the Standing Order, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") somewhat boldly asserted in its June 6th filing that the Board no longer had jurisdiction …

Tell Us What You Really Think: CVC Asserts Board Decision in ‘115 Interference Negates Jurisdiction in Interference Nos. 106,127 and 106,132 Read More »

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to designate certain claims deemed in the Declaration as corresponding to the …

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Broad Contingent Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims 52-54 of Broad Application No. 16/177,403 to the interference, …

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Broad Contingent Motion No. 2 Read More »

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to substitute the interference Count, pursuant to the provisions of 37 …

Junior Party Broad Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to Sigma’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Deny Priority Benefit in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Preliminary Motion No. 1 that asked the Board to deny the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) benefit of its U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/736,527, filed December 12, 2012 (termed "P1"), pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.121(a)(1) and S.O. ¶¶ …

Sigma-Aldrich Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to Sigma’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Deny Priority Benefit in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to CVC’s Responsive Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — Pursuant to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Order issued November 29, 2021, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") on December 17, 2021 filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), …

CVC Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to CVC’s Responsive Motion No. 1 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132

By Donald Zuhn — On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to substitute the Count of the interference pursuant …

CVC Files Reply to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to be Accorded Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional …

CVC Files Reply to Sigma-Aldrich Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to be Accorded Priority Benefit Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Reply to Junior Party CVC’S Opposition to Its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Count in Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132, asking the Board to substitute the Count pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1). Junior Party the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively "CVC") filed its …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Reply to Junior Party CVC’S Opposition to Its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Count in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Junior Party’s Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to designate certain claims deemed in the Declaration as corresponding to the …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Junior Party’s Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Broad Contingent Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims 52-54 of Broad Application No. 16/177,403 to the interference, …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Broad Contingent Motion No. 2 Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Junior Party Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to substitute the interference Count, pursuant to the provisions of 37 C.F.R. …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to Junior Party Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Junior Party Broad Files Opposition to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On March 16th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 filed on December 3rd by Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich. To recap, Sigma-Aldrich’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 asked the Board to deny Broad benefit of its U.S. Provisional …

Junior Party Broad Files Opposition to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

CVC Files Opposition to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Count in Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132, asking the Board to substitute the Count pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1). Junior Party the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively "CVC") filed its …

CVC Files Opposition to Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Count in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 4 in Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — On February 18th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 4* from the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC"), Junior Party in Interference No. 106,132, wherein CVC moved to add Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s U.S. Patent Nos. 10,731,181 and 10,745,716 …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 4 in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — On February 18th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 from the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC"), Junior Party in Interference No. 106,132, wherein the Junior Party moved to change the interference Count pursuant to 37 C.F.R. …

Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to be Accorded Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On February 18th, Sigma-Aldrich filed its Opposition to Junior Party’s (the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier; collectively, "CVC") Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132, asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/652,086, …

Sigma-Aldrich Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to be Accorded Priority Benefit Read More »

PTAB Holds for Broad in CRISPR Interference: The Reasoning

By Kevin E. Noonan — Inventorship determinations have been called, in some of their incarnations, "one of the muddiest concepts in the muddy metaphysics of patent law." Mueller Brass Co. v. Reading Indus., 352 F. Supp. 1357, 1372 (E.D. Pa. 1972), aff’d, 487 F.3d 1395 (3d Cir. 1983); see In re VerHoef, 888 F.3d 1362, …

PTAB Holds for Broad in CRISPR Interference: The Reasoning Read More »

PTAB Grants Priority for Eukaryotic CRISPR to Broad in Interference No. 106,115

By Kevin E. Noonan — In an 82-page decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted priority for eukaryotic CRISPR to the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") as Senior Party and against Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC"). Accordingly, all of Broad’s patents …

PTAB Grants Priority for Eukaryotic CRISPR to Broad in Interference No. 106,115 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Remove Broad Application from Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) as Junior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to remove Broad’s U.S. Application No. 15/330,876 from the interference, pursuant to …

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Remove Broad Application from Interference Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Deny Broad Priority Benefit to Its Earliest-filed Provisional Application

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) as Junior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny Broad benefit of its U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/736,527, filed …

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Deny Broad Priority Benefit to Its Earliest-filed Provisional Application Read More »

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 to Designate Claims as not Corresponding to Count in Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to designate certain claims deemed in the Declaration as corresponding to the …

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 to Designate Claims as not Corresponding to Count in Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Broad Files Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Designate Claims Corresponding to Substitute Count 3

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims 52-54 of Broad Application No. 16/177,403 to the interference, …

Broad Files Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Designate Claims Corresponding to Substitute Count 3 Read More »

PTAB Hears Oral Argument in Interference No. 106,115

By Kevin E. Noonan — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board heard oral argument under 37 C.F.R. § 41.124(c) on February 4th in the Priority Phase of Interference No. 106,115 between the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") as Senior Party and the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier …

PTAB Hears Oral Argument in Interference No. 106,115 Read More »

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Substitute the Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to substitute the interference Count, pursuant to the provisions of 37 C.F.R. …

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Substitute the Count Read More »

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — Pursuant to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Order issued November 29, 2021, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") on December 17, 2021 filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), …

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit Read More »

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Set Date for Oral Hearing in Interference No. 106,115

By Kevin E. Noonan — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has set February 4th at 1:00 pm EST for the Oral Hearing in the Priority Phase of Interference No. 106,115 between the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") as Senior Party and the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle …

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Set Date for Oral Hearing in Interference No. 106,115 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion 1 to Change the Count in Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132 (where the Broad Institute, Harvard University and MIT, collectively, "Broad" is the Junior Party) asking the Board to substitute the Count pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1). In its Statement …

Sigma-Aldrich Files Substantive Preliminary Motion 1 to Change the Count in Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Top Three Stories of 2021

By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 15th annual list of top patent stories. For 2021, we identified nine stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and …

Top Three Stories of 2021 Read More »

CVC Files Substantive Miscellaneous Motion No. 4 to Add Senior Party Patents and Designate Claims Corresponding to the Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Miscellaneous Motion No. 4 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add Sigma-Aldrich’s U.S. Patent Nos. 10,731,181 …

CVC Files Substantive Miscellaneous Motion No. 4 to Add Senior Party Patents and Designate Claims Corresponding to the Count Read More »

CVC Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 for Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to substitute the Count of the interference …

CVC Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 for Priority Benefit Read More »

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional …

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit Read More »

PTAB Sets Motions and Times in CVC vs. Sigma Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — Following a telephone conference held on August 16th (a transcript of which can be found here) between the Board and representatives of Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") and Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich, the Board issued its Order on September 20th authorizing …

PTAB Sets Motions and Times in CVC vs. Sigma Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

PTAB Sets Motions and Times in Broad vs. Sigma Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — Following a telephone conference held on August 16th (a transcript of which can be found here) between the Board and representatives of Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) and Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich, the Board issued its Order on September 20th authorizing motions and setting times …

PTAB Sets Motions and Times in Broad vs. Sigma Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich and CVC Propose Preliminary Motions in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132

By Kevin E. Noonan — The parties in Interference No. 106,132, namely Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC"), filed their respective lists of proposed preliminary motions four days prior to their August 3rd teleconference with the Board to present their arguments for …

Sigma-Aldrich and CVC Propose Preliminary Motions in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich and Broad Propose Preliminary Motions in Recent CRISPR Interference No. 106,133

By Kevin E. Noonan — The parties in Interference No. 106,133, namely Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich and Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad"), filed their respective lists of proposed preliminary motions four days prior to their August 3rd teleconference with the Board to present their arguments for the Board to grant …

Sigma-Aldrich and Broad Propose Preliminary Motions in Recent CRISPR Interference No. 106,133 Read More »

Sigma-Aldrich Joins the CRISPR Interference Fray

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 21st,* the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declared two new interferences involving CRISPR technology. The first, Interference No. 106,132, named Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party and the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") as Junior Party, while the second, Interference No. 106,133 named …

Sigma-Aldrich Joins the CRISPR Interference Fray Read More »

Inequitable Conduct by Senior Party Broad Alleged in Interference No. 106,115 (and PTAB May Finally Hear Evidence About It)

By Kevin E. Noonan — An enduring and persistent (albeit until now unresolved) issue in the patent interferences involving the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") as Senior Party and the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") as Junior Party has been the question of whether Broad …

Inequitable Conduct by Senior Party Broad Alleged in Interference No. 106,115 (and PTAB May Finally Hear Evidence About It) Read More »

SNIPR Technologies Ltd. v. The Rockefeller University (PTAB 2021)

By Kevin E. Noonan — It is well to recall that the battle over inventorship and thus ownership of CRISPR technology is not limited to the parties in the various interferences surrounding the Doudna and Zhang patents and applications (see "CRISPR Battle Joined Again" and "The CRISPR Chronicles: Enter Toolgen"), as well as remembering that …

SNIPR Technologies Ltd. v. The Rockefeller University (PTAB 2021) Read More »

ToolGen Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, Broad Opposes, and ToolGen Replies in Interference No. 106,126

By Kevin E. Noonan — On October 1st, Senior Party ToolGen Inc. filed its Motion to Exclude certain evidence presented by Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") in Interference No. 106,126. Broad filed its Opposition to ToolGen’s motion on October 8th, and ToolGen filed its Reply on October 15th. ToolGen’s …

ToolGen Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, Broad Opposes, and ToolGen Replies in Interference No. 106,126 Read More »

ToolGen Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, CVC Opposes, and ToolGen Replies in Interference No. 106,127

By Kevin E. Noonan — In its turn, on September 17th, Senior Party ToolGen Inc. filed its Motion to Exclude certain evidence presented by Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") in Interference No. 106,127. CVC filed its Opposition to ToolGen’s motion on October 8th, and ToolGen …

ToolGen Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, CVC Opposes, and ToolGen Replies in Interference No. 106,127 Read More »

CVC Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, ToolGen Opposes, and CVC Replies in Interference No. 106,126

By Kevin E. Noonan — On September 17th, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Motion to Exclude certain evidence presented by Senior Party ToolGen Inc. in Interference No. 106,126. ToolGen filed its Opposition to CVC’s motion on October 8th, and CVC filed its Reply …

CVC Files Motion to Exclude Evidence, ToolGen Opposes, and CVC Replies in Interference No. 106,126 Read More »

CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021)

By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit continued its stringent (if misguided) application of the scope of subject matter eligibility by invalidating claims asserted in CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc. The case arose over InfoBionic’s alleged infringement of CardioNet’s U.S. Patent No. 7,099,715; claims 1, 11, and 20 are illustrative: 1. A machine-implemented method …

CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) Read More »

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126, where ToolGen is the Senior Party. On August 6th, ToolGen filed its Opposition and on September 24th Broad filed its Reply. Broad’s Motion sought …

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 1 Read More »

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to Broad’s Preliminary Motion No. 3

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party). This motion, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1) requested that the Board de-designate Broad claims in …

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to Broad’s Preliminary Motion No. 3 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed their Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny ToolGen benefit of priority to …

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to Broad’s Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Preliminary Motion No. 2 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party), contingent on the Board’s grant of Broad’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 to substitute (in part) a new Count …

Broad Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to Broad’s Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

ToolGen Reply to Broad Opposition to ToolGen Preliminary Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Senior Party ToolGen filed its Substantive Motion No. 1 for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/837,481, filed June 20, 2013 (“P3” or “ToolGen 5 P3”), or alternatively, International Application No. PCT/KR2013/009488, filed October 23, 2013 (“PCT”). Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and …

ToolGen Reply to Broad Opposition to ToolGen Preliminary Motion No. 1 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC Preliminary Motion No. 3

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims in ToolGen’s U.S. Patent …

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC Preliminary Motion No. 3 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC’s Responsive Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 11th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,127 to be accorded benefit of priority to U.S. Patent Application No. 13/842,859, filed March 15, 2013, or in the alternative …

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen’s Opposition to CVC’s Responsive Motion No. 1 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to CVC Preliminary Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit …

CVC Files Reply to ToolGen Opposition to CVC Preliminary Motion No. 1 Read More »

ToolGen Files Reply Brief to CVC’s Opposition to its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — In June, Senior Party ToolGen filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to deny Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) priority benefit to its U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/757,640, filed January 28, 2013 (“Provisional 3”), pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ …

ToolGen Files Reply Brief to CVC’s Opposition to its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

ToolGen Files Reply to CVC Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On July 15th, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its opposition to Senior Party ToolGen’s Substantive Motion No. 1 for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/837,481, filed June 20, 2013 (“P3” or “ToolGen P3”), or alternatively, International …

ToolGen Files Reply to CVC Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Motion No. 1 Read More »

CVC Files Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Motion No. 1

On July 15th, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Opposition to Senior Party ToolGen’s Substantive Motion No. 1 for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/837,481, filed June 20, 2013 (“P3” or “ToolGen P3”), or alternatively, International Application No. PCT/KR2013/009488, filed Oct. …

CVC Files Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Motion No. 1 Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Add Claims Corresponding to the Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party), pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(i) and 41.208(a)(2) and Standing Order (“SO”) 203.2. This motion is contingent on …

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Add Claims Corresponding to the Count Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 3 to De-Designate Claims as Corresponding to Either Interference Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party). This motion, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1) requested that the Board de-designate Broad claims in …

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 3 to De-Designate Claims as Corresponding to Either Interference Count Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Interference Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126, where ToolGen is the Senior Party. This Motion shared many similarities to a similar motion filed in Broad’s Interference No. 106,115 against the University …

ToolGen Files Opposition to Broad Preliminary Motion No. 1 to Change Interference Count Read More »

Broad Files Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, ToolGen filed its Substantive Motion No. 1 for benefit of priority in Interference No. 106,126, which names ToolGen as Senior Party and as Junior Party The Broad Institute, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the President and Fellows of Harvard College (collectively, “Broad”). On August 6th, Broad …

Broad Files Opposition to ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Contingent Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 11th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,127 to be accorded benefit of priority to U.S. Patent Application No. 13/842,859, filed March 15, 2013, or in the alternative …

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Contingent Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 to Add Claims in ToolGen Patent

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims in ToolGen’s U.S. Patent …

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 to Add Claims in ToolGen Patent Read More »

The Federal Circuit Addresses Commercial Success

By Michael Borella — In academic settings, objective indicia of non-obviousness are sometimes presented as a common way of rebutting contentions that a claimed invention is obvious. These indicia, set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. and reiterated in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., include commercial success, long felt but unsolved needs, unexpected …

The Federal Circuit Addresses Commercial Success Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny ToolGen benefit of priority to …

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny Priority Benefit Read More »

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional …

ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit Read More »

CVC Files Opposition to ToolGen’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — In June, Senior Party ToolGen filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to deny Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) priority benefit to its U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/757,640, filed January 28, 2013 (“Provisional 3”), pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ …

CVC Files Opposition to ToolGen’s Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in CRISPR Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party). This motion, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and 41.208(a)(1) requests that the Board de-designate Broad claims in …

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in CRISPR Interference Read More »

Broad Files Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in CRISPR Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party), pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(i) and 41.208(a)(2) and Standing Order (“SO”) 203.2. This motion is contingent on …

Broad Files Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in CRISPR Interference Read More »

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 28th, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, “Broad”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,126 (where ToolGen is the Senior Party). While this Motion shares many similarities to a similar motion filed in Broad’s interference against the University of …

Broad Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference Read More »

PTAB Denies Two CVC Requests Regarding Motions

By Kevin E. Noonan — Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied two requests by Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) in Interference No. 106,115. In the first, CVC asked a conference call to discuss its renewed request for leave to file a motion against Senior …

PTAB Denies Two CVC Requests Regarding Motions Read More »

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 11th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 to be accorded benefit of priority to U.S. provisional application No. 13/842,859, filed March 15, 2013, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. …

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 11th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 to be accorded benefit of priority to U.S. provisional application No. 13/842,859, filed March 15, 2013, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. …

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2

By Kevin E. Noonan — On June 11th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 to be accorded benefit of priority to U.S. provisional application No. 13/842,859, filed March 15, 2013, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. …

CVC Files Responsive Preliminary Motion No. 1 Contingent on Grant of ToolGen Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 Read More »

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 To Add Claims in ToolGen Patent

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to add claims in ToolGen’s U.S. Patent …

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 To Add Claims in ToolGen Patent Read More »

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny ToolGen benefit of priority to …

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny Priority Benefit Read More »

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,127 (which names ToolGen as Senior Party), asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for benefit of priority to U.S. provisional …

CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 for Priority Benefit Read More »

ToolGen Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny CVC of Priority Benefit

By Kevin E. Noonan — In Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party the Broad Institute (joined by Harvard University and MIT) and Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted CVC’s Preliminary Motion for benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional …

ToolGen Files Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 to Deny CVC of Priority Benefit Read More »

CVC Opposes Broad’s Motion to Exclude Evidence and Broad Files Reply

By Kevin E. Noonan — Late last month, Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) and Senior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (hereinafter, “Broad”) each filed Motions to Exclude Evidence in Interference No. 106,115. Now CVC has filed its Opposition to Broad’s …

CVC Opposes Broad’s Motion to Exclude Evidence and Broad Files Reply Read More »

Broad Opposes CVC’s Motion to Exclude Evidence and CVC Files Reply

By Kevin E. Noonan — Late last month, Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) and Senior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (hereinafter, “Broad”) each filed Motions to Exclude Evidence in Interference No. 106,115. Now Broad has filed its Opposition to CVC’s …

Broad Opposes CVC’s Motion to Exclude Evidence and CVC Files Reply Read More »

CRISPR Interference Parties File Motions to Exclude Evidence and for Oral Hearing

By Kevin E. Noonan — Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) and Senior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (hereinafter, “Broad”) each filed Motions to Exclude Evidence and Requests for Oral Hearing in Interference No. 106,115. CVC’s motion to exclude is directed …

CRISPR Interference Parties File Motions to Exclude Evidence and for Oral Hearing Read More »

Broad Files Reply to CVC’s Opposition to Broad’s Priority Motion

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) recently filed its reply to Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) opposition to its motion for priority in Interference No. 106,115. CVC’s opposition raised two grounds …

Broad Files Reply to CVC’s Opposition to Broad’s Priority Motion Read More »

Broad Files Reply to CVC’s Opposition to Broad’s Contingent Motion to Correct Inventorship

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last month, Senior Party The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (hereinafter, “Broad”) filed its reply to an opposition to Broad’s motion to correct inventorship filed by Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”), which was filed as a contingent …

Broad Files Reply to CVC’s Opposition to Broad’s Contingent Motion to Correct Inventorship Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC Motion for Misjoinder of Inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f)

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last December, Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Motion No. 3 under 37 C.F.R. § 41.121(a)(1) asking for judgment of unpatentability for all claims in interference under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) or (if post-AIA) 35 U.S.C. § 115(a) for …

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC Motion for Misjoinder of Inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC’s Priority Motion

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its reply to Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) motion in opposition (see “Broad Files Motion in Opposition to CVC Priority Motion”) to …

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC’s Priority Motion Read More »

ToolGen Files Protective Orders in CRISPR Interferences

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party ToolGen Inc. has filed a protective order in each of Interference Nos. 106,126 (naming as Junior Party the Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University) and 106,127 (naming as Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, collectively “CVC”) (‘126 protective order and …

ToolGen Files Protective Orders in CRISPR Interferences Read More »

CVC Files Motion Opposing Broad Motion to Correct Inventorship

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last December, Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Motion No. 3 under 37 C.F.R. § 41.121(a)(1) asking for judgment of unpatentability for all claims in interference under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) or (if post-AIA) 35 U.S.C. § 115(a) for …

CVC Files Motion Opposing Broad Motion to Correct Inventorship Read More »

Broad Files Motion Opposing CVC Motion for Misjoinder of Inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f)

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last December, Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (hereinafter, “CVC”) filed its Substantive Motion No. 3 under 37 C.F.R. § 41.121(a)(1) asking for judgment of unpatentability for all claims in interference under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) or (if post-AIA) 35 U.S.C. § 115(a) for …

Broad Files Motion Opposing CVC Motion for Misjoinder of Inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) Read More »

CVC Files Motion in Opposition to Broad Priority Motion

By Kevin E. Noonan — In its turn, Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its motion in opposition to Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) motion for priority in Interference No. 106,115. CVC’s motion challenges Broad’s …

CVC Files Motion in Opposition to Broad Priority Motion Read More »

Broad Files Motion in Opposition to CVC Priority Motion

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) filed its motion in opposition to Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) motion for priority in Interference No. 106,115. Although Broad argued in its own priority …

Broad Files Motion in Opposition to CVC Priority Motion Read More »

Time Periods in Toolgen Interferences Extended by Party Stipulation

By Kevin E. Noonan — The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has issued a notice of extension of certain deadlines by party stipulation in the two interferences involving ToolGen Inc. as Senior Party (No. 106,126 with The Broad Institute, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard College as Junior …

Time Periods in Toolgen Interferences Extended by Party Stipulation Read More »

CRISPR Chronicles Continue

By Kevin E. Noonan — While those interested in the outcome await the April 9th filing of motions authorized by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in Interference Nos. 106,126 (between Senior Party Toolgen Inc. and Junior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, …

CRISPR Chronicles Continue Read More »

CRISPR Chronicles Continue

By Kevin E. Noonan — While those interested in the outcome await the April 9th filing of motions authorized by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in Interference Nos. 106,126 (between Senior Party Toolgen Inc. and Junior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, …

CRISPR Chronicles Continue Read More »

PTAB Sets Preliminary Motions in Broad v. ToolGen Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On March 1st, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its Order on the Preliminary Motions Lists submitted by Junior Party The Broad Institute, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the President and Fellows of Harvard College (collectively, “Broad”) and Senior Party ToolGen Inc., …

PTAB Sets Preliminary Motions in Broad v. ToolGen Interference Read More »

PTAB Sets Preliminary Motions in CVC v. ToolGen Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On March 1st, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its Order on the Preliminary Motions Lists submitted by Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) and Senior Party ToolGen Inc. in Interference No. 106,127. (Somewhat curiously, the …

PTAB Sets Preliminary Motions in CVC v. ToolGen Interference Read More »

U.S. v. Arthrex: Is Historical Practice of the USPTO Relevant?

By James Lovsin — As discussed here, the Justices asked many questions in the oral argument in Arthrex this week on both questions: (1) whether there was an Appointments Clause defect and (2) if so, whether the Federal Circuit properly cured it. With respect to the first question, several of the Justices appeared skeptical that …

U.S. v. Arthrex: Is Historical Practice of the USPTO Relevant? Read More »

U.S. v. Arthrex: Supreme Court Oral Argument

By Kevin E. Noonan — The Supreme Court heard argument on Monday in U.S. v. Arthrex, involving the question of whether appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) and their authority under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Both the Government and Smith & Nephew, who lost this argument below, …

U.S. v. Arthrex: Supreme Court Oral Argument Read More »

The Toolgen Interference: Broad Preliminary Motions List

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party Toolgen and Junior Parties The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (collectively, “Broad”) in Interference No. 106,126 and University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) in Interference No. 106,127 each filed Lists of Proposed Motions that the Board considered recently …

The Toolgen Interference: Broad Preliminary Motions List Read More »

The Toolgen Interference: Preliminary Motions Lists

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party Toolgen and Junior Parties The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (collectively, “Broad”) in Interference No. 106,126 and University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) in Interference No. 106,127, each filed Lists of Proposed Motions that the Board considered last …

The Toolgen Interference: Preliminary Motions Lists Read More »

The Toolgen Interference: CVC Preliminary Motions List

By Kevin E. Noonan — Senior Party Toolgen and Junior Parties The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University (collectively, “Broad”) in Interference No. 106,126 and University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) in Interference No. 106,127 each filed Lists of Proposed Motions that the Board considered today …

The Toolgen Interference: CVC Preliminary Motions List Read More »

The CRISPR Chronicles: Enter Toolgen

By Kevin E. Noonan — The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board has declared interferences individually between Toolgen as Senior Party and as Junior Party the parties in the pending interference, Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and The University of California/Berkeley, the University of …

The CRISPR Chronicles: Enter Toolgen Read More »

PTAB Grants CVC Motion for Marraffini Deposition

By Kevin E. Noonan — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) entered an Order on Tuesday regarding the motion by Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) in Interference No. 106,115, for leave to subpoena discovery from Luciano Marraffini and Shuailiang Lin, neither of whom is …

PTAB Grants CVC Motion for Marraffini Deposition Read More »

Top Four Stories of 2020

By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 14th annual list of top patent stories. For 2020, we identified eight stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and …

Top Four Stories of 2020 Read More »

Separate Interferences Declared between Toolgen and Broad and CVC over CRISPR Priority Question

By Kevin E. Noonan — One of the most notable movie taglines, “Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water,” was used to market the sequel to the original summer blockbuster movie, Jaws. It is perhaps impossible to not think of that message upon learning that the Patent Trial and …

Separate Interferences Declared between Toolgen and Broad and CVC over CRISPR Priority Question Read More »

Top Stories of 2020: #5 to #8

By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 14th annual list of top patent stories. For 2020, we identified eight stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and …

Top Stories of 2020: #5 to #8 Read More »

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC’s Miscellaneous Motion No. 6; Board Issues Orders

By Kevin E. Noonan — Motion practice continues in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”), with CVC filing on January 6th its Reply to Broad’s opposition …

CVC Files Reply to Broad’s Opposition to CVC’s Miscellaneous Motion No. 6; Board Issues Orders Read More »

Broad Files Priority Motion in CRISPR Interference*

By Kevin E. Noonan — In the latest development in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”), Broad filed its priority motion (which, as Senior Party they …

Broad Files Priority Motion in CRISPR Interference* Read More »

CVC Files Substantive Motion No. 3 (for Improper Inventorship) and Broad Opposes

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last fall the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in Interference no. 106,115, granted leave to Junior Party The University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) to file a dispositive motion for improper inventorship against Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute …

CVC Files Substantive Motion No. 3 (for Improper Inventorship) and Broad Opposes Read More »

Broad Files Motion Opposing CVC’s Motion to Subpoena Witnesses

By Kevin E. Noonan — At the end of October, in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) consented to …

Broad Files Motion Opposing CVC’s Motion to Subpoena Witnesses Read More »

CVC Discloses Priority Evidence and Earliest Conception Date in Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — Almost three weeks ago, on October 31st, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) filed its priority motion in Interference No. 106,115, setting forth for the first time its earliest conception date (March 1, 2012) and evidence of that conception for practicing …

CVC Discloses Priority Evidence and Earliest Conception Date in Interference Read More »

CRISPR Housekeeping

By Kevin E. Noonan — Since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rendered its decisions on Motions in Interference No. 106,115, Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”) have filed …

CRISPR Housekeeping Read More »

Supreme Court to Consider Constitutional Propriety of Appointment of PTAB Judges

By James Lovsin — Today, the Supreme Court granted petitions for a writ of certiorari to review the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., in which the court of appeals held how administrative patent judges were appointed to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) violated the Appointments Clause of …

Supreme Court to Consider Constitutional Propriety of Appointment of PTAB Judges Read More »

PTAB Grants Broad Motion No. 4 for Priority Benefit to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/736,527

By Kevin E. Noonan — In the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision on motions issued September 10th in Interference No. 106,115 (see “PTAB Decides Parties’ Motions in CRISPR Interference”) between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University …

PTAB Grants Broad Motion No. 4 for Priority Benefit to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/736,527 Read More »

PTAB Denies Broad Motion No. 3 to De-designate Claims as Not Corresponding to Count No. 1

By Kevin E. Noonan — In the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision on motions issued September 10th in Interference No. 106,115 (see “PTAB Decides Parties’ Motions in CRISPR Interference”) between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University …

PTAB Denies Broad Motion No. 3 to De-designate Claims as Not Corresponding to Count No. 1 Read More »

CVC Takes Its Turn at Filing Dispositive Motion to End Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — For those with long memories, last August the Patent Trial and Appeal Board received proposed motions from the parties (University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, Junior Party, and The Broad Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University, Senior Party) in Interference No. 106,115. Thereafter, the …

CVC Takes Its Turn at Filing Dispositive Motion to End Interference Read More »

PTAB Denies Broad Motion No. 2 to Substitute the Interference Count

By Kevin E. Noonan — In the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision on motions issued September 10th in Interference No. 106,115 (see “PTAB Decides Parties’ Motions in CRISPR Interference”) between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, “Broad”) and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University …

PTAB Denies Broad Motion No. 2 to Substitute the Interference Count Read More »

Claim Construction by PTAB in CRISPR Interference Decision

By Kevin E. Noonan — Judge Giles Sutherland Rich’s most famous aphorism in patent law is “the name of the game is the claim.”* This rubric is important to keep in mind when considering the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision on motions issued September 10th in Interference No. 106,115 (see “PTAB Decides Parties’ Motions …

Claim Construction by PTAB in CRISPR Interference Decision Read More »

PTAB Decision Denying Broad’s Substantive Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference

By Kevin E. Noonan — On September 10th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board rendered its decision on the parties’ Motions in Interference No. 106,115 (see “PTAB Decides Parties’ Motions in CRISPR Interference”). Perhaps the decision of most immediate significance was the Board’s decision denying the Senior Party’s (The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the …

PTAB Decision Denying Broad’s Substantive Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference Read More »

USPTO Initiates Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program

By Donald Zuhn — In a notice published in the Federal Register last month (85 Fed. Reg. 39888), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced that it was initiating a Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program, to provide for the advancement of applications out of turn in ex parte appeals before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. …

USPTO Initiates Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program Read More »

Arthrex Files Certiorari Petition in Arthrex case

By Kevin E. Noonan — Arthrex recently filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew Inc. (a case related to Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which has also the subject of petitions from the U.S. government and Smith & Nephew). The Questions Presented are: 1. Whether the …

Arthrex Files Certiorari Petition in Arthrex case Read More »

U.S. Government Petitions for Certiorari in Arthrex Case

By Kevin E. Noonan — Last fall, the Federal Circuit decided in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) serving on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were principal officers and thus had been improperly appointed under the Appointments Clause, and accordingly vacated a PTAB determination in an inter …

U.S. Government Petitions for Certiorari in Arthrex Case Read More »

Smith & Nephew File Certiorari Petition in Arthrex Case

By Kevin E. Noonan — While the Federal Circuit’s decision last fall in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. raised issues about the appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) serving on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), it should be remembered that it also wiped out a PTAB decision in favor of Smith …

Smith & Nephew File Certiorari Petition in Arthrex Case Read More »

In re Boloro Global Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Federal Circuit Extends Arthrex to Patent Prosecution By James Lovsin and Alexa Giralamo* — This week, the Federal Circuit extended its holding in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., that administrative patent judges (“APJs”) were improperly appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause, to ex parte proceedings in In re Boloro Global Limited. Under …

In re Boloro Global Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2020) Read More »