Prosecutor and Litigator Roundtable — Adapting to the New Landscape of Patentable Subject Matter, Indefiniteness, and Willfulness

March 4, 2015 2:30pm

Michael A. Siem
Shareholder
Farney Daniels P.C.

Matthew K. Blackburn
Partner
Locke Lord LLP

Jeffrey Hohenshell
Senior Patent Attorney
Medtronic, Inc.

The Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have had much to say of late on the basics of patent issuance. The PTO — examiners and administrative judges alike — and district courts then need to incorporate these standards into their review of existing patents, or those challenged in IPRs or litigation. In this session, experienced medical device patent prosecutors and litigators will draw on examples from cases before the PTO or district courts to explore the effects the major cases identified below have had on (a) evaluating patent portfolios, (b) drafting future claims, and (c) adjusting litigation tactics:

  • Mayo v. Prometheus and Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
  • Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Intern
  • Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.
  • Teva v. Sandoz and Octane Fitness v. Icon Health and Fitness