Federal Circuit Should Reconsider Ariosa v. Sequenom: The Panel Decision Threatens Modern Innovation

Here’s a brief excerpt of a post by Devlin Hartline that was published on IPWatchdog. In an amicus brief co-authored by Kevin Noonan of McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP and Professor Adam Mossoff of George Mason University School of Law, twenty-three law professors urge the Federal Circuit to take a second look at the … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Should Reconsider Ariosa v. Sequenom: The Panel Decision Threatens Modern Innovation”

Federal Circuit Threatens Innovation: Dissecting the Ariosa v. Sequenom Opinion

By Patent Publius Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Ariosa v. Sequenom, a closely-watched biotechnology case with significant repercussions for patent-eligibility analysis generally. Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit misapplies the Supreme Court’s analytical framework from Mayo v. Prometheus, striking down Sequenom’s important innovation for the prenatal diagnosis of fetal abnormalities. The shame … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Threatens Innovation: Dissecting the Ariosa v. Sequenom Opinion”

Anti-Patent Bias in Applying Injunction Test Results in Another District Court’s Reversal – Aria Diagnostics v. Sequenom (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2013)

[Cross Posted to Truth on the Market] In its recent decision in Douglas Dynamics v. Buyers Products Co. (Fed. Cir., May 21, 2013), the Federal Circuit was forced to reverse a district court’s abuse of its discretion because the trial judge injected an anti-patent bias into the legal test for determining whether a patent-owner should … Continue reading “Anti-Patent Bias in Applying Injunction Test Results in Another District Court’s Reversal – Aria Diagnostics v. Sequenom (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2013)”