The reach of the med-tech patent wars now includes devices for electroencephalography thanks to a complaint recently filed by Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Ceribell Inc. with the U.S. International Trade Commission. The company alleged infringement of six of its patents by two units under the Natus umbrella of companies, but this conflict is also under review in Delaware district court, promising a drawn-out conflict that may not resolve for years.

The med tech patent wars opened a new front in the region of screening tests for colorectal cancer, pitting Exact Sciences Corp., of Madison, Wisc., against St. Louis-based Geneoscopy Inc.

The Trump administration nominated John Squires of the firm of Dilworth Paxson to take the post of director of the Patent and Trademark Office, but the appointment faces a few hurdles.

While the U.S. Supreme Court sidelined itself over patent issues such as subject matter eligibility, the diagnostic patent wars are still in full swing as a casual review of cases at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office discloses.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office opted to allow the 2.0 pilot version of the After Final Consideration Program to expire, bringing to an end a program that ran for longer than a decade.

The proposal to overhaul the use of terminal disclaimers in U.S. patent filings won over no fans among former directors of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, but device and drug makers, too, are concerned about the proposal.

The proposal to overhaul the use of terminal disclaimers in U.S. patent filings won over no fans among former directors of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, but device and drug makers, too, are concerned about the proposal.

Sometimes a court cites long-standing precedent in deciding how to handle a case, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit leveraged a decision it rendered only last year in deciding a patent case between Apple Inc., and Omni Medsci Inc.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has released a guidance to aid patent examiners in dealing with questions of obviousness in patent applications, but patent attorney Michael Borella told BioWorld that this new guidance could resurrect the law of unintended consequences. Borella, a partner in the Chicago office of McDonnell Boehnen Hulburt & Berghoff LLP, said the guidance might lead to more inappropriate rejections of patent claims for obviousness, and thus make the process of obtaining a clean patent more difficult, not less.

The U.S. FDA has posted information on the regulatory review period for several medical devices that incorporate patented inventions, such as the determination for the Simplify artificial cervical disc by Simplify Medical Inc., of Sunnyvale, Calif. According to the FDA, the company seeks to tack nearly 1,100 days back on to the patent in question, an additional three years that may play a significant role in the company’s attempt to monetize the patent in question.