{"id":522,"date":"2009-09-09T12:58:40","date_gmt":"2009-09-09T18:58:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=522"},"modified":"2009-09-09T12:58:40","modified_gmt":"2009-09-09T18:58:40","slug":"martek-biosciences-v-nutrinova","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=522","title":{"rendered":"Martek Biosciences v. Nutrinova"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In the recent case of <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Martek Biosciences v. Nutrinova<\/span> an expanded panel of five judges heard the appeal.\u00a0 The audience at oral argument that day included visiting dignitaries from other countries and is the likely reason that an expanded panel was used.<\/p>\n<p>An important issue in this case was whether\u00a0 the claim term &#8220;animal&#8221; included humans.\u00a0 The expanded panel produced a more &#8220;animated&#8221;\u00a0oral argument than usual.\u00a0 At one point Judge Rader remarked that his tennis playing would clearly categorize him as an animal while at another point Judge\u00a0Gajarsa\u00a0surmised that\u00a0Judge Rader&#8217;s\u00a0tennis playing was encompassed under the explicitly recited category of &#8220;swine.&#8221;\u00a0 And, Judge Moore offered that Judge Rader was not a mammal because he lacked the ability to produce milk.\u00a0 [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/2008-1459-excerpt.mp3\">Listen<\/a>]\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Judges Lourie and Rader dissented from the majority opinion and asserted that the claim term &#8220;animal&#8221; did not include humans for the patent at issue.<\/p>\n<p>You can listen to the entire oral argument [<a href=\"http:\/\/oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov\/mp3\/2008-1459.mp3\">Here<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>You can read the court&#8217;s opinion [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/opinions\/08-1459.pdf\">Here<\/a>].<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the recent case of Martek Biosciences v. Nutrinova an expanded panel of five judges heard the appeal.\u00a0 The audience at oral argument that day included visiting dignitaries from other countries and is the likely reason that an expanded panel was used. An important issue in this case was whether\u00a0 the claim term &#8220;animal&#8221; included [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,3],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522"}],"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=522"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":528,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522\/revisions\/528"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=522"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=522"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=522"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}