June 27, 2017: Your weekly dose from the world of patents. The Patent Chronicle is led by Syam Anand, who has been at the core of CSG’s development and an entrepreneur himself. This section is your go to destination every week for a capsule dose on the hottest happenings in the patent world. Syam has clinically dissected out every news on the decision, the background and the impact. He is also in the process of building his scicomm team for this section. If you would like to come aboard, mail him at email@example.com
China gives CRISPR patent to UC Berkeley
Decision: China’s State Intellectual Property Office granted Doudna and Charpentier the CRISPR patent.
Impact: UC Berkeley’s patent on CRISPR has broader claims compared one of the Broad Institute’s patents that claimed a “victory” in an infringement battle at the USPTO. UC Berkeley’s application was also granted in the EU and UK. These wins are good for Doudna’s CRISPR startups, Intellia and Caribou Life Sciences and bad for Editas, which has licensed CRISPR from Broad Institute.
— TechCrunch (@TechCrunch) June 19, 2017
US Supreme Court to look at Patent Review process
Decision: The US Supreme Court has taken up an appeal by a Texas company that essentially questions the Patent Office’s right to cancel patents it previously granted.
Reason: Texas-based Oil States International Inc had previously lost a case in a lower court where it argued that patent owners have a right to a jury trial, as patents are private property and USPTO’s inter partes review process does not give them their constitutional right, as they are decided by administrative judges. The Supreme Court had earlier ruled that owners of private property who have their rights revoked have a right to a jury trial.
Impact: If the Supreme Court sides with Oil States International, it will directly question the constitutionality of the PTAB review procedure and also the larger question whether patents are private property.
— Gary Shapiro (@GaryShapiro) June 15, 2017
Patent activity tied to growth
Source: The Rise of American Ingenuity: Innovation and Inventors of the Golden Age
Ufuk Akcigit, John Grigsby, Tom Nicholas, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 23047, January 2017
- Strong positive correlation between patent activity and GDP growth.
- Small numbers of inventors (0.02 per cent of the population) have high impact on their communities.
- Higher urbanization tended to have more innovation probably by clustering people and supporting interaction of people and ideas.
- Access to capital supported innovation, showcasing a need for strong capital economy for patent activity and innovation.
- Geographical isolation negatively correlated with patent activity.
- Positive correlation between patent activity and upward social mobility.
— Economics21 (@Economics21) June 20, 2017
STRONGER Patents Act Introduced in the US senate
Decision: Senators Chris Coons (Democrat; Delaware) and Tom Cotton (Republican; Arkansas) introduced the Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience (STRONGER) Patents Act in the US Senate.
Background: Two years back, an earlier version of the Act (STRONG, without the ER) that was introduced by Sen. Coons failed to pass in the Senate. The new bill is a revised version of the old one. It is apparently aimed at strengthening the patent system by a set of proposed legislation that will gut many of the provisions in America Invents Act (AIA).
Impact: The US Patent Office with the help of AIA has been pursuing to strengthen the patent system by strengthening procedures that gets rid of low quality patents. The STRONGER Patents Act wants to reverse that by making it difficult to challenge the validity of patents in the USPTO using those procedures. The proposed legislation is unlikely to go anywhere. However, it throws light on how a section of America views the patent system and where and how the validity of patents can be questioned. One major focus of the proposed legislation is the post-grant review procedures in the USPTO.
— NYIPLA (@NYIPLA) June 26, 2017
Cleveland Clinic’s cardiovascular disease diagnostic patent invalidation remains
Decision The federal circuit supported the District Court of Ohio’s ruling invalidating Cleveland Clinic’s diagnostic patents.
Background: Cleveland Clinic had brought an infringement suit against True Health Diagnostics LLC on the Clinic’s cardiovascular disease diagnostic test patents. The Ohio court had used the US Supreme Court’s 2012 famed Mayo decision that natural laws are not patentable to invalidate the Clinic’s patents. In essence patents that cover nothing more than the natural correlation become invalid in light of Mayo. In this case, the Ohio court ruled that the Clinic’s patents covered nothing more than a natural correlation between an enzyme and an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
Impact: The US Supreme Court’s Mayo decision and its impact on diagnostic patents are very familiar to people familiar with intellectual property law. The latest decision on the Clinic’s patent invalidation is a case worth reading and understanding for people who are in the business of developing diagnostic tools and understanding the distinction between innovation and patentability.
— US Fed Cir (@USFedCircuitCt) June 16, 2017
Proprietary humor by Mimi and Eunice
About the author:
Authored by Dr Syam Anand, PhD (Indian Institute of Science, IISc; Post-Doctoral research, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine; Faculty, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Founder and US Patent Agent, Mainline Intellectual Property LLC, Ardmore, Philadelphia USA). Syam has over 20 years experience in diverse areas of Science with domain knowledge in Life Sciences and Intellectual Property. Dr. Anand is also an inventor and budding entrepreneur. A rationalist, Dr. Anand enjoys science at all levels and advocates the use of scientific methods for answering all questions and solving all problems and make common people curious and interested in understanding their worlds.
Featured image source: Pixabay
Blog design: Abhinav Dey
This work by ClubSciWri is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.