About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristant #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« EPO Prepares to Roll out New Prior Art Search Disclosure Rules | Main | IPO Files Amicus Brief in AMP v. USPTO »

November 01, 2010

Comments

The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) also filed an amicus brief on Friday, in support of neither party, but supporting reversal: http://www.aipla.org/Content/ContentGroups/About_AIPLA1/AIPLA_Reports/20106/AIPLA-Myriad-Amicus-filed.pdf

How can that brief be "in support of neither party" yet urge reversal in favor of Myriad??

Dear Johnny:

The brief does not argue that the patents-in-suit are not invalid, just that the district court's decision was legal error.

But you are correct, Myriad will benefit from reversal.

Thanks for the comment.

Thanks, Karen. We will post on the brief.

The comments to this entry are closed.

May 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31