Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec, No. 06-1634 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 19, 2008)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 06-1634
Decided
December 19, 2008
Judge
Moore, J.
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
4 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2006-1634, -1649

CLASSEN IMMUNOTHERAPIES, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

BIOGEN IDEC,

Defendant-Appellee, and

GLAXOSMITHKLINE,

Defendant-Appellee, and

MERCK & CO., INC.,

Defendant-Cross Appellant, and

CHIRON CORPORATION, KAISER-PERMANENTE, INC., KAISER PERMANENTE

VENTURES, KAISER PERMANENTE INTERNATIONAL, KAISER PERMANENTE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE PERMANENTE FEDERATION, LLC, THE PERMANENTE COMPANY, LLC, THE PERMANENTE FOUNDATION, THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC., KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, KAISER FOUNDATION ADDED CHOICE HEALTH PLAN, INC.,

and KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC.,

Defendants.

Joseph J. Zito, Zito tlp, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

Joshua M. Hiller, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, for defendant-appellee, Biogen IDEC. On the brief were David B. Bassett, of New York, New York, and David A. Wilson, of Washington, DC. George F. Pappas, Covington & Burling LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee, GlaxoSmithKline. With him on the brief were Jeffrey B. Elikan and Kevin B. Collins. Of counsel was Scott C. Weidenfeller.

2Mary B. Graham, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, of Wilmington, Delaware, argued for defendant-cross appellant. With her on the brief was James W. Parrett, Jr. Of counsel on the brief were Robert L. Baechtold, Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto, of New York, New York; and Edward W. Murray and Mary J. Morry, Merck & Co., Inc., of Rahway, New Jersey. Appealed from: United States District Court for the District of Maryland Judge William D. Quarles, Jr.

3United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2006-1634, -1649

CLASSEN IMMUNOTHERAPIES, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

BIOGEN IDEC,

Defendant-Appellee, and

GALAXOSMITHKLlNE,

Defendant-Appellee, and

MERCK & CO., INC.,

Defendant-Cross Appellant, and

CHIRON CORPORATION, KAISER-PERMANENTE, INC., KAISER PERMANENTE

VENTURES, KAISER PERMANENTE INTERNATIONAL, KAISER PERMANENTE

INSURANCE COMPANY, THE PERMANENTE FEDERATION, LLC, THE

PERMANENTE COMPANY, LLC, THE PERMANENTE FOUNDATION, THE

PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC., KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS,

KAISER FOUNDATION ADDED CHOICE HEALTH PLAN, INC., and KAISER

FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in Case No. 04-CV-2607, Judge William D. Quarles, Jr.

DECIDED: December 19, 2008

4Before NEWMAN and MOORE, Circuit Judges, and FARNAN, District Judge. *

MOORE, Circuit Judge.

In light of our decision in In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc), we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment that these claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Dr. Classen’s claims are neither “tied to a particular machine or apparatus” nor do they “transform[] a particular article into a different state or thing.” Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.

Footnotes

  1. * Hon. Joseph J. Farnan, Jr., United States District Court for the District of Delaware, sitting by designation. 2006-1634, -1649 2

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec, No. 06-1634 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 19, 2008).

Record ID
CAFC-06-1634-20081219
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-06-1634-20081219

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.