Author Archives: Gary Juskowiak

Drafting Health Sciences Process Claims after Prometheus

The Supreme Court’s decision in Mayo v. Prometheus (2012) raised the 35 USC §101 bar on patentable process claims in the health sciences.  Prometheus’ patented processes adjusted the dosage of thiopurine, based on the concentration of drug metabolites in a … Continue reading

Tagged , , , , Leave a comment

Post Grant Review as a Tool for Challenging Pharmaceutical Patents

Under the recently passed Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), generic drug manufacturers will be able to use post grant review (“PGR”) to effectively invalidate or constrain pharmaceutical patents. The efficiency of PGR and the lower burden of proof for the PGR process in comparison … Continue reading

Tagged , , , , Leave a comment

Stent Wars: Cordis Corp v. Boston Scientific Corp., Fed. Cir. (2011)

The Stent Wars The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) decision in Cordis Corp v. Boston Scientific Corp., 2011 (“Cordis”), is the latest episode in the ongoing Stent Wars, and provides an example of CAFC review of JMOL … Continue reading

Tagged , , , Leave a comment

Lewton v. Divingnzzo: Hidden Audio Recorder in Teddy Bear Violates Federal Privacy Law

Overview of Lewton Parents who are concerned about their child’s well being might use hidden electronic monitoring devices such as hidden audio recording devices and nanny cams.  Unfortunately, parents who use these devices may unwittingly violate federal and state law.  … Continue reading

Tagged , 1 Comment

People v. Xinos: A Privacy Right in Vehicle Data

A California Privacy Right in Vehicle Data In People v. Xinos, 192 Cal. App. 4th 637 (2011) (PDF), the California Sixth District Court of Appeal ruled on a person’s privacy right in his vehicle’s sensing and diagnostic module (SDM) data. This … Continue reading

Tagged , , Leave a comment

iLOR v. Google: A Two-Part Test for Identifying Vexatious or Unjustified Litigation

Summary Collectively,  Brooks Furniture and iLOR v. Google (PDF) establish the standards a defendant must meet for an award of attorney fees from vexatious and unjustified litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 285.  Brooks Furniture Manufacturing, Inc. v. Dutailier International, Inc., … Continue reading

Tagged , Leave a comment