Skip Page Banner  
Skip Navigation

Chakrabarty to Myriad: Life Sciences Technologies and Patentable Subject Matter



Thursday, March 28, 2013
Product Code - LGN125
Speaker(s): Elizabeth S. Weiswasser, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP; Nicolas G. Barzoukas, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Add To Cart
View the Brochure
Since the Supreme Court’s observation that “Congress intended statutory subject matter to ‘include anything under the sun that is made by man,’” there have been shifting tides as to the precise boundaries of patent eligibility for life science technologies. The Court addressed these issues in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. and will soon address patent eligibility under section 101 again in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. The Federal Circuit has likewise been active in this area and the precise rules as to what is patentable and what is not across the broad array of life sciences technologies has yet to be spelled out.

This program will provide a comprehensive overview of the history of patent eligible subject matter jurisprudence for life science technologies, including discussions of Diamond v. Chakrabarty up through Mayo and Myriad, and will also provide analysis regarding what issues have been resolved and where the law still remains murky. Also addressed will be specific types of claims across life sciences technologies and where they stand on section 101 patentability.

Educational Objectives:

• Understand the historical evolution of the doctrine of patentable subject matter, particularly as applied to life sciences technologies.
• Learn the implications of the Supreme Court’s Mayo decision and what can be expected in the upcoming Myriad case.
• Gain an understanding of the patent eligibility of a broad array of claim types, including composition and method, across life sciences technologies.

Who would benefit most from attending the program?

• In-house counsel at companies involved with pharmaceutical, biologic, or similar products.
• Practitioners who litigate or counsel companies involved with pharmaceutical or biologic products.

Program Level: Intermediate

Credit Available: CLE. For more information, please click on the “CLE Credit” tab.

Elizabeth S. Weiswasser, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP; Nicolas G. Barzoukas, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

Elizabeth S. Weiswasser, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Elizabeth Weiswasser focuses her practice on the life sciences industry, with a particular emphasis on patent and other intellectual property matters relating to biologic and pharmaceutical technologies. In addition to her patent litigation practice, in which she has litigated patent cases in venues across the country and across a broad range of technology areas, Ms. Weiswasser counsels clients across a broad range of intellectual property issues and regularly handles diligence-related matters in the context of a broad range of corporate transactions in the life sciences sector.

Ms. Weiswasser was recently named “Up & Coming Intellectual Property Lawyer of the Year” by Chambers USA Women in Law. She is recognized for her work in the area of patent litigation by Chambers USA 2012 and was selected by Law360 as one of only five “MVPs” for 2012 in the category of Life Sciences.

Ms. Weiswasser is an Adjunct Professor of Law at New York University Law School, where she co-teaches Biotechnology Patent Law, and she is also a frequent lecturer and writer on intellectual property related issues in the life sciences and related sectors. She earned a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School and a B.A. from Northwestern University.

Nicolas G. Barzoukas, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Nicolas Barzoukas’ practice is devoted to intellectual property litigation, including patent, trade secret, and trade dress litigation. He concentrates on patent litigation in the pharmaceutical field and has also litigated in industries related to chemistry, electronics, biotechnology, medical devices, lasers and mechanical systems. In 2001, the Texas Lawyer recognized him as one of 40 “up-and-comers” in the Texas legal community. Mr. Barzoukas was recognized in Chambers USA - America’s Leading Lawyers for Business 2005 - 2010 in the field of Patent Litigation in Texas.

Mr. Barzoukas’ representations in Hatch-Waxman Act patent infringement suits have resulted in the protection of the franchises for several blockbuster pharmaceutical products. In addition, he successfully challenged the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s rule denying the application of Hatch-Waxman Act patent term restoration to patents receiving a new, 20-year, patent term established by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

Mr. Barzoukas earned a J.D. from the University of Texas Law School and a B.S. from Baylor University.

This program is CLE-credit eligible.

If you have further questions regarding a specific state or how to file for CLE credit, please contact Bloomberg BNA customer service at 800-372-1033 and ask to speak to the Legal and Business CLE Accreditation Coordinator.

Hardship Policy
Bloomberg BNA offers a hardship policy for attorneys earning less than $50,000 per year. If an attorney wishes to take advantage of this option, he or she must contact Bloomberg BNA directly. For attorneys who are unemployed or earning less than $35,000 per year, a full discount off the price of the program will be awarded upon written proof of hardship. Attorneys earning between $35,000 and $50,000 per year will receive a 50% discount off the price of the program. Any attorney working in the public service sector also qualifies for a special price. If you have further questions regarding the hardship policy or seek additional information, please contact Bloomberg BNA customer service at 800-372-1033 and ask to speak to Lindsey Pace, CLE Accreditations Coordinator, or email us at accreditations@bna.com.

Questions
For more information about Mandatory or Minimum Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) requirements, visit the American Bar Association website at http://www.abanet.org/cle/mandatory.html.