{"id":2553,"date":"2010-08-27T19:52:52","date_gmt":"2010-08-28T01:52:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=2553"},"modified":"2010-08-29T14:48:20","modified_gmt":"2010-08-29T20:48:20","slug":"cybor-watch","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=2553","title":{"rendered":"Cybor Watch"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>It has been almost four years since the Federal Circuit declined to take <em>en banc<\/em> review of\u00a0the\u00a0case <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel<\/span>\u00a0that would have\u00a0allowed the court to review its<em> en banc<\/em> ruling in <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><em>Cybor<\/em> <em>Corp v. FAS Techs., Inc<\/em>.<\/span>, 138 F.3d 1448 (Fed. Cir. 1998).\u00a0\u00a0 In declining to hear the <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Amgen<\/span> case <em>en banc<\/em>, several of the judges\u00a0noted that when the right case came along, they would be willing to grant <em>en banc<\/em> review to reconsider <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cybor<\/span>.\u00a0\u00a0 [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/images\/stories\/opinions-orders\/05-1157o.pdf\">Read<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>Judge Clevenger and Judge Moore recently made these comments which seemed to imply\u00a0discontent with\u00a0the <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cybor<\/span>\u00a0precedent\u00a0during the oral argument of <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Lincoln National Life Insurance Co.\u00a0v. Transamerica Life Insurance Co.<\/span>, 2009-1403 (Fed. Cir. June 23, 2010): [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/08\/2009-1403-lincoln-exc-1.mp3\">Listen<\/a>].\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Judge Moore also made a comment about revisiting <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cybor<\/span> back in 2009 during the oral argument of <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Kara Technology, Inc.\u00a0v. Stamps.com, Inc.<\/span>\u00a0[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/08\/2009-1027-excerpt-1.mp3\">Listen<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>And, you might recall that the court can take <em>en banc<\/em> review <em>sua sponte<\/em>.\u00a0 They did so in <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Abbott Labs v. Sandoz, Inc.<\/span>, 566 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2009) on the limited issue of product-by-process claims, for example.<\/p>\n<p>One wonders if the time is now\u00a0ripe and\u00a0whether the vacancies on the court favor\u00a0granting <em>en banc<\/em> review of <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cybor<\/span>.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>The Cybor decision is available here: [<a href=\"http:\/\/bulk.resource.org\/courts.gov\/c\/F3\/138\/138.F3d.1448.96-1287.96-1286.html?referer=www.clickfind.com.au\">Read<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>(I should note that I am not\u00a0advocating an <em>en banc<\/em> review of <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cybor<\/span> &#8212; just curious if it is coming down the pike.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It has been almost four years since the Federal Circuit declined to take en banc review of\u00a0the\u00a0case Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel\u00a0that would have\u00a0allowed the court to review its en banc ruling in Cybor Corp v. FAS Techs., Inc., 138 F.3d 1448 (Fed. Cir. 1998).\u00a0\u00a0 In declining to hear the Amgen case en banc, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2553"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2553"}],"version-history":[{"count":37,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2553\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2922,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2553\/revisions\/2922"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}