Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec

Federal Circuit

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec

304 F. App'x 866

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit·Decided December 19, 2008·No. Nos. 2006-1634, 2006-1649·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

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 “transforme ] a particular article into a different state or thing.” Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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 “transforme ] a particular article into a different state or thing.” Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec, 304 F. App'x 866 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

Pincite

304 F. App'x 866 (Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related