Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec
659 F.3d 1057
Fed. Cir.
2008
Check Treatment
Docket

CLASSEN IMMUNOTHERAPIES, INC. v. BIOGEN IDEC, GLAXOSMITHKLINE, MERCK & CO., INC., 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.

2006-1634, -1649

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

December 19, 2008

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

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.

Mary 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.

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

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

MOORE, Circuit Judge.

In light of our decision in (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.” . Therefore we affirm.

Notes

*
Hon. Joseph J. Farnan, Jr., United States District Court for the District of Delaware, sitting by designation.