Digital Commons Network^™

Ajinomoto V. Itc, The Doctrine Of Equivalents, And Biomolecule Claim Limitations At The Federal Circuit, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The doctrine of equivalents (DOE) allows a court to hold an accused infringer liable for patent infringement in spite of the fact that the accused product (or process) does not fall within the literal scope of the asserted patent claim(s). Prosecution history estoppel (PHE), which can be triggered by a narrowing amendment of a patent claim during patent prosecution, or by arguments made during prosecution, imposes significant constraints on the ability of a patentee to assert the DOE. The 1990s and early 2000’s saw a proliferation of legal commentary postulating that the DOE would play an important role in protecting …

Helsinn V. Teva: Lingering Ambiguity After The U.S. Supreme Court Holds The Aia Did Not Alter The On-Sale Bar To Patentability, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The American Innovation Act of 2011 (AIA) retained §102 of the pre-AIA Patent Act’s “in public use” and “on-sale” bars to patentability, but introduced an additional “or otherwise available to the public” category of prior art. Federal Circuit precedent pre-dating the AIA has held that, as a general matter, a sale or offer for sale can create an on-sale bar to patentability even if the sale or offer for sale is “secret” and does not render the invention available to the public. Some believed that the AIA’s introduction of the phrase “or otherwise available to the public” altered the meaning …

Recent Pto Guidance Charts A New Course Through The Patent Eligibility Quagmire, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In a span of four years, 2010-2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued four decisions that have dramatically altered patent eligibility jurisprudence: Bilski, Mayo, Myriad, and Alice. Ever since Bilski was decided, the PTO has struggled to apply the new patent eligibility jurisprudence in a consistent and predictable manner. The two part framework for assessing patent eligibility, as set for in Alice and Mayo, is stated at a high level of abstraction, and the Supreme Court has given little concrete guidance as to how it is to be applied beyond the specific claims at issue in its precedent. At times, the …

Vanda V. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals: Good News For The Patent Eligibility Of Diagnostics And Personalized Medicine, With Some Important Caveats, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In Mayo v. Prometheus, decided in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated patent claims directed towards diagnostic methods useful in the optimization of drug dosage for the needs of an individual patient, i.e., an example of personalized medicine, based on the Court’s determination that the claims were directed towards a patent ineligible law of nature. Notably, the claims in Mayo did not recite a step of applying the information generated by the test, e.g., a step of administering the drug to a patient at the optimized dosage. Some, including this author, have speculated that inclusion of such a step might …

Congress Considering Legislation Intended To Reverse The Recent Trend Toward Devaluation Of The Us Patent Right, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

Decisions of the United States Supreme Court spanning the last quarter of a century that have, in the aggregate, substantially devalued the patent right. The Court’s four decisions reinvigorating and substantially raising the patent eligibility bar have probably resulted in the most critical commentary, but a host of other decisions have also served to erode the patent right in multiple dimensions, including the scope of potentially patent-able subject matter as well as the strength and enforce-ability of issued patents. In 2011 Congress joined in when it enacted the America Invents Act (AIA), which includes multiple provisions tending to devalue patents, …

Praxair V. Mallinckrodt: An Expanded Interpretation Of The Printed Matter Doctrine With Important Implications For Biotechnology, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

Although the “printed matter doctrine” has a long history in U.S. patent law, until recently it has played a relatively minor role in policing patent-ability, so much so that an article published in 1994 essentially wrote it off as nothing more than an “archaic common law has-been.” Although the doctrine is rooted in the concept of patent eligibility, it is never mentioned in recent patent eligibility decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court such as Mayo and Alice, and patent law treatises and casebooks tend to give the doctrine little if any coverage. At its core, the printed matter doctrine has …

A Biotechnology-Centric Look At Fee Shifting In Patent Litigation Post-Octane Fitness, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies decision (Akamai III), in conjunction with the Federal Circuit’s stance on divided infringement claims, effectively undermined the value of method claims, particularly in the realm of pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, and other biotechnology related innovation, by limiting the ability of patentees to establish liability in cases where steps of the claimed method are performed by multiple parties. On remand, the en banc Federal Circuit in Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks (Akamai IV) sought to address the problem by expanding the definition of direct infringement under 271(a) to encompass more scenarios …

The Supreme Court’S Devaluation Of U.S. Patents, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In a span of three weeks during the spring of 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued three patent decisions, bringing the total number of patent decisions for the 2016-2017 term to six. This means that the October 2016 term ties the previous record of six patent decisions in the October 2014 term. This represents a tremendous increase in the number of patent decisions compared to earlier times, and particularly the early days of the Federal Circuit. For reference, during the first quarter of a century the Federal Circuit was in existence, the Supreme Court heard on average less than one …

Charting The Contours Of Copyright Regime Optimized For Engineered Genetic Code, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

There is a growing disconnect between the traditional patent-centric approach to protecting biotechnological innovation and the emerging intellectual property imperatives of “synthetic biology,” a promising new manifestation of biotechnology that enables the design and construction of artificial biological pathways, organisms or devices, as well as the redesign of existing natural biological systems. As explained in previous articles, one way to deal with this disconnect would be to expand the scope of copyrightable subject matter to encompass engineered genetic sequences, much in the way that copyright was expanded in the 1970s and 1980s to include computer programs. The present article expands …

Eli Lilly V. Teva: Generic Companies Infringe Under Akamai Iv In Case Of Divided Infringement, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies decision (Akamai III), in conjunction with the Federal Circuit’s stance on divided infringement claims, effectively undermined the value of method claims, particularly in the realm of pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, and other biotechnology related innovation, by limiting the ability of patentees to establish liability in cases where steps of the claimed method are performed by multiple parties. On remand, the en banc Federal Circuit in Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks (Akamai IV) sought to address the problem by expanding the definition of direct infringement under 271(a) to encompass more scenarios …

Are Engineered Genetic Sequences Copyrightable?: The U.S. Copyright Office Addresses A Matter Of First Impression, Christopher M. Holman, Claes Gustafsson, Andrew W. Torrance

Faculty Works

In spite of the compelling logic that would support extending copyright to engineered DNA sequences, copyright protection for genetic code has not been legally recognized in the US, or as far as we know anywhere. The Copyright Act is silent on the point, the courts do not appear to have ever addressed the question, and the Copyright Office has taken the position that an engineered genetic sequence is not copyrightable subject matter. In an attempt to advance the conversation, we submitted an engineered DNA sequence to the Copyright Office for registration, and then appealed the Office’s decision refusing to register …

The Mayo Framework Is Bad For Your Health, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

This Article begins by providing a brief historical retrospective of the development of the patent eligibility doctrine, and then delves into the related questions of: (1) what are the Supreme Court’s policy objectives for the recent reinvigoration of the patent eligibility doctrine; and (2) has it achieved those objectives? The article then discusses three important out-standing questions regarding the application of the new test for patent eligibility: (1) what constitutes a natural phenomenon; (2) what constitutes an inventive step; and (3) what, if any, role does preemption play in the analysis? The article then provides four examples of recent lower …

The Critical Role Of Patents In The Development, Commercialization And Utilization Of Innovative Genetic Diagnostic Test And Personalized Medicine, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

Arguments in favor of reining in the availability of effective patent protection in the area of genetic diagnostic testing are based largely on two fundamental misconceptions regarding the role of patents in this important area of technological innovation. The first is the mistaken assumption that patents negatively impact patient access to genetic diagnostic testing by preventing research that might lead to new or improved versions of a genetic test and by increasing the cost of testing services. The second is the failure to appreciate the substantial positive role patents play in in the development and utilization of genetic diagnostic tests. …

Developments In Synthetic Biology Are Altering The Ip Imperatives Of Biotechnology, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

While the accomplishments of the biotechnology industry have been substantial, recent technological advances promise to dramatically increase the power and utility of the discipline over the coming years. The term “synthetic biology” has been coined to describe the application of these powerful new tools to the engineering of synthetic genetic sequences and organisms. In essence, synthetic biology represents the next iteration in the ongoing evolution of biotechnology, and hopes run high that in time, the fruits of synthetic biology will dwarf the past successes of conventional biotechnology. There is, however, some concern that the current patent-centric approach to Intellectual Property …

Do Biotech Patent Lawsuits Really “Overwhelmingly Lose?”: A Response To Our Divided Patent System, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

On October 14, 2014, Stanford’s Professor Mark Lemley tweeted “My new study with Allison & Schwartz shows that software and biotech patent lawsuits overwhelmingly lose.” He was referring to an article entitled Our Divided Patent System, co-authored by Lemley and two other prominent law professors. Taken at face value, the assertion that “biotech patent lawsuits overwhelmingly lose” would seem to hold troubling implications for biotechnology. In order to better understand the basis for Lemley’s assertion, I reanalyzed the underlying data and found that the situation is not nearly as bleak as his tweet might suggest. My significantly different interpretation of …

Bowman V. Monsanto Co.: Bellweather For The Emerging Issue Of Patentable Self-Replicating Technologies And Inadvertent Infringement., Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The inherent tendency of patented seeds to self-replicate has led to fears that farmers might face liability for inadvertent patent infringement. To address the perceived problem, some have proposed severely limiting the availability of effective patent protection for self-replicating technologies. Typical examples include denying patent rights to "second generation" self-replicating products, and even broadly declaring such technologies ineligible for patent protection. The fact is, lawsuits against inadvertently infringing farmers remain of largely hypothetical concern. However, changes in the market could soon render such lawsuits a reality. In addressing the resulting policy concerns, Congress and the courts have at their disposal …

Copyright For Engineered Dna: An Idea Whose Time Has Come, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The rapidly emerging field of synthetic biology has tremendous potential to address some of the most compelling challenges facing our planet, by providing clean renewable energy, nutritionally-enhanced and environmentally friendly agricultural products, and revolutionary new life-saving cures. However, leaders in the synthetic biology movement have voiced concern that biotechnology's current patent-centric approach to intellectual property is in many ways ill-suited to meet the challenge of synthetic biology, threatening to impede follow-on innovation and open access technology. For years, copyright and patent protection for computer software have existed side-by-side, the two forms of intellectual property complementing one another. Numerous academic commentators …

Will Gene Patents Impede While Genome Sequencing?: Deconstructing The Myth That 20% Of The Human Genome Is Patented, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

A 2005 Science article by Jensen and Murray is widely cited for the proposition that 20% of human genes are patented, and has led to a pervasive assumption that thousands of human genes cannot be used, studied or even 'looked at' by researchers and healthcare providers without infringing a gene patent. Many have voiced concern that this perceived thicket of gene patents will impede the implementation of next-generation genetic technologies, particularly personal whole genome sequencing (WGS). In fact, Jensen and Murray only showed that, with respect to 20% of human genes known at the time they conducted their study, either …

Bilski: Assessing The Impact Of A Newly Invigorated Patent Eligibility Doctrine On The Pharmaceutical Industry And The Future Of Personalized Medicine, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The patent eligibility doctrine serves a gatekeeper role in excluding from patent protection natural phenomena, principles of nature, abstract ideas, and mental processes. Beginning around 1980, the U.S. patent system embarked upon a pronounced expansion in its definition of patent eligible subject matter, particularly with respect to software and business method inventions, but also in the life sciences. In recent years, however, we have seen a backlash, with many critics from the public and private sectors arguing that the threshold for patent eligibility needs to be raised in order to ensure that patents fulfill their constitutional objective of encouraging innovation …

Maintaining Incentives For Healthcare Innovation: Response To The Ftc's Report On Follow-On Biologics, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

Congress is considering legislation that would create an abbreviated FDA approval process for follow-on biologics (FOBs), which proponents anticipate will promote competition and lower prices in the market for biologic drugs. In June of 2009 the FTC published a report on FOBs (“the FTC Report”), which attempts to forecast the nature of competition between innovator biologics and FOBs, and offers a number of substantive recommendations regarding specific provisions of the various FOB bills. In particular, the FTC Report concludes that there is essentially no justification for the inclusion of a substantial data exclusivity period (“DEP”) for innovators in pending FOB …

Learning From Litigation: What Can Lawsuits Teach Us About The Role Of Human Gene Patents In Research And Innovation, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In 2007, I published an article entitled "The Impact of Human Gene Patents on Innovation and Access: A Survey of Human Gene Patent Litigation," in which I reported the results of a project to identify and characterize all instances in which a human gene patent was asserted in a lawsuit. For the purposes of this study, I essentially treated any US patent claiming a product or process involving one or more specific human genes as a "human gene patent."

In the present article I explore in greater depth some of the implications of the 2007 study, and discuss some general …

The Impact Of Human Gene Patents On Innovation And Access: Survey Of Human Gene Patent Litigation, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In 2005, an article in the highly influential journal Science reported that roughly 20% of human genes are patented. This figure has been widely cited and at times over-interpreted. For example, a popular science fiction author warns the public that their bodies are "owned" by someone else. A bill was introduced in Congress in 2007 that would essentially seek to ban the patenting of DNA. The bill appears motivated in part by a perception that one-fifth of our genes are owned by somebody else, that these owners can do whatever they want with these genes, and that there is "nothing …

Is Lilly Written Description Paper Tiger?: Comprehensive Assessment Of The Impact Of Eli Lilly And Its Progeny In The Courts And Pto, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

In University of California v. Eli Lilly, decided by the Federal Circuit in 1997, the court established for the first time a new form of patent law's written description requirement, apparently targeted specifically at biotechnology. To this day, the conventional wisdom is that the so-called Lilly written description requirement (LWD) exists as a biotechnology-specific super-enablement requirement, substantially more stringent than the enablement requirement (the conventional standard for patentability), and standing as an impediment to effective patent protection for biotechnology inventions. My objective in writing this article was to test this conventional wisdom, by conducting a comprehensive search for all LWD …

Biotechnology's Prescription For Patent Reform, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

On June 8, 2005, Congressman Lamar Smith introduced H.R. 2795, the Patent Reform Act of 2005, aimed at improving the quality and certainty of issued patents, simplifying the patent procurement process, harmonizing U.S. law with international practice, and reining in abusive patent enforcement practices. Congress has set the legislation aside for the time being, but will likely revisit the issue again shortly. The biotechnology industry, one of the fastest growing sectors in the United States economy, strongly opposes many of the proposed reforms. This paper considers the Congressional testimonies of the Biotechnology Industry Organization ("BIO") and other representatives of biotechnology's …

Protein Similarity Score: Simplified Version Of The Blast Score As Superior Alternative To Percent Identity For Claiming Genuses Of Related Protein Sequences, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

Recombinant proteins form the basis for most of the products of biotechnology, including drugs, diagnostics, research reagents, genetically modified organisms and industrial enzymes. However, the nature of proteins and the rules of patentability conspire to make it difficult to achieve adequate patent protection for novel proteins and the polynucleotides that encode them. Narrow patent claims limited to protein sequences sharing a high degree of structural identity can generally be designed around by introducing structural changes in the claimed protein, thereby avoiding the patent without substantially altering the protein's function. However, inventors are generally restricted in their ability to broadly claim …