Keeping pace with the ever-changing life sciences industry, Morrison Foerster stays on top of the trends and political, legal, and economic drivers to support striking the balance between innovative discovery and purposeful business planning to assure our clients continued success. MoFo Life Sciences shares timely legal and business insights and in-depth analyses on trends and the complex technologies at the heart of the global pharmaceutical, biotechnology, diagnostics, medical devices, digital health, and AgTech fields.Learn more about our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/capabilities/life-sciences-healthcare" target="_self">Life Sciences practice</a>.<h2 dir="ltr">ABOUT MORRISON FOERSTER</h2>Morrison Foerster is a leading global law firm that transforms complexity into advantage for its clients. Our clients include some of the largest financial institutions, banks, consulting and accounting firms, and Fortune 100, technology, and life sciences companies. Highlighting the firm’s commitment to client service, leadership in market-changing deals and impact litigation, and values-based culture, Morrison Foerster has been repeatedly recognized as one of the top 10 firms on The American Lawyer’s A-List. Year after year, the firm receives significant recognition from Chambers and The Legal 500 across their various guides, including Global, USA, Asia‑Pacific, Europe, UK, Latin America, and FinTech Legal. Our lawyers passionately care about delivering legal excellence while living our values. Morrison Foerster has a long-standing commitment to creating a culture that respects and celebrates differences, while providing an inclusive environment. The firm has achieved Mansfield Certification Plus since 2018 as a result of successfully reaching at least 30 percent women, communities of color, and LGBTQ+ lawyer representation in a notable number of current leadership roles and committees. The firm also has a long history of commitment to the community and society through providing pro bono legal services, including litigating for civil rights and civil liberties, improving public education and fostering the wellbeing of children, advocating for veterans, promoting international human rights, enforcing the right to asylum, and safeguarding the environment.

Social

Search

Subscribe

Life Sciences and Healthcare Group

Life Sciences Podcast

Patent Counseling + Prosecution

FDA Regulatory + Life Sciences Compliance

FDA + Healthcare Regulatory and Compliance 

Life Sciences Transactions + Licensing

Resources

Editors

230315-new-mofo-life-sciences-logo.jpg

Dr. Meghan Poon counsels clients on patent preparation and prosecution, portfolio strategy, and IP due diligence in the areas of biotechnology and biologics. She has significant experience in diverse technologies including antibodies, cell therapies, gene therapies, diagnostics, and gene-edited plants. She represents clients ranging from large international pharmaceutical companies to midsized companies, startups, and universities.Meghan has filed numerous Patent Term Extension applications to secure additional term for her clients’ patents, which cover FDA-approved products. In addition, Meghan has extensive experience addressing complex obviousness-double patenting and subject matter eligibility issues impacting her clients’ patent portfolios. Meghan also represents clients in both investor-side and target-side due diligence, in deals from seed funding to initial public offerings.Prior to law school, Meghan attended graduate school at the University of California, Los Angeles, where she received a Ph.D. in biological chemistry based on her work on protein-protein and protein-DNA interactions at a molecular level. Meghan is the author of several scientific publications and has presented her research at international conferences.Meghan received her J.D. from the University of Southern California Law School and spent a year as a visiting student at Santa Clara University, where she focused on intellectual property.

poon_meghan_blog_150x150.png

poon_meghan_common_640x280.jpg

poon_meghan_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

poon_meghan_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

poon_meghan_social_600x600.jpg

Partner

Dr. Meghan Poon counsels clients on patent preparation and prosecution, portfolio strategy, and IP due diligence in the areas of biotechnology and biologics. She has significant experience in diverse technologies including antibodies, cell therapies, gene therapies, diagnostics, and gene-edited plants.

Meghan Poon

Wolfgang advises clients on contentious and non-contentious matters involving their most valuable intellectual property assets in life sciences, digital, and high-tech industries.His subjects of focus include research and development collaborations, complex licensing agreements, and other technology transactions, as well as know-how protection strategies, and employee invention law. He also has substantial experience in litigating patents, trademarks, and other intellectual property assets, often in a multijurisdictional context. In addition, Wolfgang and his team frequently clear trademarks and ad campaigns and prosecute trademark applications.Wolfgang is co-editor of our <a href="https://lifesciences.mofo.com/" dir="ltr" target="_blank">MoFo Life Sciences Blog</a>.Wolfgang is a partner of Morrison Foerster based in our German office in Berlin.<h4 dir="ltr">Representative Transactional Matters</h4><ul dir="ltr"><li>U.S.-based BioTech fund on various research collaborations and other transactions with German start-ups or research institutions.</li><li>Negotiate multimillion-euro strategic partnership between two AgTech leaders concerning the development and commercialization of pest-resistant transgenic traits.</li><li>Craft global multi-million collaboration regarding AI-powered robotic MaaS.</li><li>UK-based digital health company on product roll-out of RPM applications in Germany; coordinate international expansion.</li><li>Advise numerous German start-ups on their U.S. expansion.</li><li>Draft diverse global patent and know-how license agreements in the areas of AgTech and life sciences—including gene licensing and licensing of genome editing technologies (e.g., CRISPR)—and medical devices; draft correlating supply and distribution agreements.</li><li>Structure IP rights in connection with joint ventures and other M&A transactions, including the carve-out of a patent-heavy semiconductor business comprising nine jurisdictions into a German–U.S. joint venture.</li><li dir="ltr">Advise on government-funded, multi-partner R&D projects and/or R&D projects with academic institutions, as well as on employee invention law.</li></ul><h4 dir="ltr">Representative Contentious IP Matters</h4><ul dir="ltr"><li>Lead counsel in an international dispute between software companies on rights and obligations following termination of a multi-million licensing and distribution arrangement; coordinate local counsel.</li><li>Defend Japanese chip manufacturer in high-profile SEP-litigation; advise on global settlement arrangement.</li><li>Represent leading internet retailer in patent infringement and concurrent invalidity proceedings in the context of a multijurisdictional dispute concerning touch-screen technology.</li><li>Represent diverse pharmaceutical and life sciences companies in national and cross-border patent infringement proceedings and other technology-related disputes, including preliminary injunctions as well as pre‑trial discovery and inspection proceedings, concerning, inter alia, drug-coating technologies, toner cartridges, medicinal gases, transgenic plants, and vaccines.</li><li dir="ltr">Conduct trademark, copyright, and false advertising litigation, including, most notably, a high-profile trademark litigation for a German bank, and a nine-country cross-border trademark litigation involving a famous pharmaceutical brand.</li></ul>

Dr. Wolfgang Schönig berät Mandanten zum Schutz des geistigen Eigentums sowohl in streitigen als auch nichtstreitigen Angelegenheiten, mit einem besonderen Fokus auf die IP-rechtliche Beratung von Unternehmen aus den Bereichen Life Sciences, Digitalwirtschaft und High-Tech.Zu seinen Beratungsschwerpunkten gehören Forschungs- und Entwicklungskooperationen, komplexe Lizenzvertragsgestaltungen und andereTechnologie-Transaktionen, sowie Know-how-Schutz-Strategien und das Arbeitnehmererfinderrecht. Er verfügt zudem über umfangreiche Prozesserfahrung zur Durchsetzung von Patenten, Marken- und anderen IP-Rechten, häufig auch in einem grenzüberschreitenden Kontext. Darüber hinaus bewertet Dr. Wolfgang Schönig zusammen mit seinem Team regelmäßig die Rechtskonformität von Werbekampagnen, prüft die Verfügbarkeit von Marken und entwickelt entsprechende Anmeldestrategien.Dr. Wolfgang Schönig ist Co-Editor des Life Sciences Blogs von Morrison Foerster.Er hat seinen Doktortitel an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf und seinen LL.M. an der Fordham School of Law in New York erworben, jeweils mit Schwerpunkt im gewerblichen Rechtsschutz. Seinen MBA-Abschluss erhielt er von der European University in Barcelona.Dr. Wolfgang Schönig ist Partner des deutschen Büros von Morrison Foerster in Berlin.<h4 dir="ltr">Repräsentative Transaktionen</h4><ul><li dir="ltr">BioTech-Fonds mit Sitz in den USA bei verschiedenen Forschungskooperationen und anderen Transaktionen mit deutschen Start-ups oder Forschungseinrichtungen</li><li dir="ltr">Verhandlung einer hochvolumigen strategischen Partnerschaft zwischen zwei Technologieführern im Bereich Crop Science betreffend der Entwicklung und Kommerzialisierung von bestimmten Resistenzen</li><li dir="ltr">Gestaltung einer globalen Multi-Millionen-Zusammenarbeit für KI-gestützte Roboter</li><li dir="ltr">Ein in Großbritannien ansässiges Unternehmen für digitale Gesundheit bei der Markteinführung von RPM-Anwendungen in Deutschland; Koordination der internationalen Expansion</li><li dir="ltr">Beratung zahlreicher deutscher Start-ups bei deren US-Expansion</li><li dir="ltr">Strukturierung und Verhandlung diverser Patent- und Know-How-Lizenzen in den Bereichen Ag Tech und Life Sciences – einschließlich Fragen zu genome editing wie CRISPR-Medizingeräte, sowie Gestaltung von Softwarelizenzverträgen und Erstellung korrespondierender Liefer- und Vertriebsvereinbarungen</li><li dir="ltr">Strukturierung von IP-Rechten im Zusammenhang mit Joint Ventures und anderen M&A-Transaktionen, darunter die Koordination eines neun Länder umfassenden IP Carve-Outs im Rahmen eines Halbleiter-JVs</li><li dir="ltr">Beratung zu staatlich geförderten Multi-Partner F&E-Projekten und/oder F&E-Projekten mit akademischen Einrichtungen sowie zum Arbeitnehmererfindungsrecht</li></ul><h4 dir="ltr">Repräsentative IP-Streitigkeiten</h4><ul><li dir="ltr">Lead Counsel in einem internationalen Rechtsstreit zwischen Softwareunternehmen über Rechte und Pflichten nach Beendigung einer millionenschweren Lizenz- und Vertriebsvereinbarung; Koordinierung der lokalen Anwälte</li><li dir="ltr">Verteidigung eines japanischen Chipherstellers in einem prominenten Streitfall bezüglich Standardessentieller Patente (SEP); Beratung zu einer globalen Vergleichsregelung</li><li dir="ltr">Verteidigung einer führenden Internetplattform gegen Ansprüche eines Patenttrolls wegen vermeintlicher Verletzung von Patent bezüglich Touchscreen-Technologie sowie korrespondierende US-Streitigkeiten</li><li dir="ltr">Vertretung von Pharma- und Life Science-Unternehmen in nationalen und grenzüberschreitenden Patentverletzungsverfahren und anderen technologiebezogenen Streitigkeiten, einschließlich einstweiliger Verfügungsverfahren und vorprozessualer Beweissicherungs- und Besichtigungsverfahren, unter anderem in Bezug auf Arzneimittelbeschichtungstechnologien, Tonerkartuschen, medizinische Gase, transgene Pflanzen und Impfstoffe</li></ul>

schonig_wolfgang_blog_150x150.png

schonig_wolfgang_common_640x280.jpg

schonig_wolfgang_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

schonig_wolfgang_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

schonig_wolfgang_social_600x600.jpg

Wolfgang Schönig is a partner of Morrison Foerster (International) LLP based in our German office in Berlin. His practice specialty is advising on IP aspects relative to transactions in, among others, the life sciences, AgTech and pharmaceuticals industry, as well as legal representation in IP disputes. Wolfgang is specialized in research and development collaborations, complex licensing agreements, technology acquisitions, know-how protection strategies, and employee invention law.

Wolfgang Schönig focuses his practice on IP aspects relative to transactions in the digital, telecoms, high tech, life sciences, and pharmaceuticals industry, as well as legal representation in IP disputes.

Wolfgang Schönig advises clients on IP aspects relating to transactions in, among others, the life sciences, AgTech and pharmaceuticals industry, as well as legal representation in IP disputes. His additional focus areas include research and development collaborations, complex licensing agreements, technology acquisitions, know-how protection strategies, and employee invention law.

Wolfgang Schönig

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

MoFo Life Sciences shares timely legal and business insights and in-depth analyses on trends and the complex technologies at the heart of the global pharmaceutical, biotechnology, diagnostics, medical devices, digital health, and AgTech fields.

life-sciences-featured-image.jpg

life-sciences-featured-image

Announcements

Welcome to Mofo Life Sciences

Blog - Terms of Use

Cookies

Blog - Privacy Policy

Blog - Blog Disclaimer

Blog - Attorney Advertising

morrison-foerster-blog-logo.png

Brings together legal insights and in-depth analyses on trends and complex issues shaping the global technology industry.

MoFo Tech Blog

MOFO TECH

Equips our clients with the most up-to-date and relevant information on employment and labor law issues.

Employment Law Commentary

EMPLOYMENT LAW COMMENTARY

Stay on top of emerging issues and stay informed of developments related to the law and business of social media.

Socially Aware

SOCIALLY AWARE

In-depth analysis of developments and trends impacting government contracting.

Government Contracts Insights Blog

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS INSIGHTS

Provides insights and reports on the most current class actions lawsuits and product liability issues that affect consumer-facing companies.

Class Dismissed Blog

CLASS DISMISSED

MoFo Life Sciences

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

Life Sciences Blog - RSS

Stay Connected

Never miss a post from MoFo Life Sciences. Enter your email below to stay up-to-date.

Because No One is Immune to the Law

Morrison Foerster - Footer

Blogs -  Home Button

Home

Blog - Topics

AI + Robotics

Agtech

Antitrust

Asia

Bioinformatics

Biotech

Blockchain

Cell + Gene Therapy

CFIUS

Corporate + Venture Capital

COVID-19

Data Analytics

Digital Health

Employment

European Union

Financing

Global

Healthcare

Intellectual Property

Licensing + Commercial

Litigation

Medical Devices + Diagnostics

Pharma

Privacy + Data Security

Product Liability + Class Action

Rare Disease

Regulatory

Startup

United Kingdom

United States

Topics

Blog - Editors

Blog - About

About

Blog - Subscribe

Meghan McLean Poon Ph.D.

More

What is “Healthy?” Are Fats In?

Stop-Gap Spending Bill Provision Takes Aim at Biologics Patent Litigation

An InSECURE Future: Court Ruling Guts USDA Regs on Genetically Engineered Plants

USPTO Fee Changes for 2025

Uspto Withdraws Consideration of Controversial Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice

The increase in AI-related patent filings in the past few years has given rise to unique questions about the current patent system. In particular, the question of whether an AI system can or should be named as an inventor on a patent application has been at the forefront of issues raised by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) in their requests for comment on AI patents (see our <a target="_blank" href="https://lifesciences.mofo.com/topics/AI-patent-policy-calling-all-life-sciences-practitioners.html">first </a>and second <a target="_blank" href="https://lifesciences.mofo.com/topics/Global-IP-policy-in-the-age-of-AI.html">article</a>). Last week, in a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/16524350_22apr2020.pdf">decision </a>refusing to vacate a Notice to File Missing Parts issued in U.S. Patent Application No. 16/524,350 (the ’350 Application), the USPTO made clear that an AI system cannot be named as an inventor in a patent application.The ’350 Application, titled “Devices and Methods for Attracting Enhanced Attention,” named an AI system as the sole inventor, listing “DABUS” as the inventor’s given name and “Invention generated by artificial intelligence” as the family name. The ’350 Application lists Stephen L. Thaler as the Assignee, Applicant, and the Legal Representative. DABUS, short for “Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience,” is an AI system developed by the Applicant. The Notice to Filing Missing Parts was issued by the USPTO for an alleged failure to “identify each inventor by his or her legal name” on the filing papers.A petition was filed requesting that the Notice to File Missing Parts be vacated for being unwarranted and/or void because the invention of the ’350 Application was generated by DABUS, a “creativity machine” programmed as a series of neural networks that were trained using general information to create the invention. According to the Petitioner, DABUS recognized the novelty and salience of the invention, and was thus properly named as the inventor.The USPTO, however, disagreed that the AI system satisfied the requirements for an inventor. In the issued decision, the USPTO stated that the language of Title 35 of the United States Code consistently refers to an inventor as a natural person. As examples, the USPTO pointed to the term “[w]hoever,” as recited in 35 § U.S.C. 101, and the use of pronouns “himself” and “herself” when referring to the “individual” who believes himself or herself to be the original inventor or an original joint inventor of a claimed invention, as recited in 35 § U.S.C. 115. In the USPTO’s view, broadly interpreting the term “inventor” to include machines “would contradict the plain reading of the patent statutes that refer to persons and individuals.”The USPTO also pointed to cases decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to bolster the decision. In Univ. of Utah v. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften E.V., it was decided that a state could not be an inventor. Similarly, in Beech Aircraft Corp. v. EDO Corp., the Federal Circuit ruled that “inventorship” and corporate “ownership” differed in that “only natural persons can be inventors.” The underlying consideration in both cases was the notion that conception, which is regarded as the “touchstone of inventorship,”1 is a “mental act” and formed “in the mind of the inventor.” The USPTO reasoned that conception “must be performed by a natural person,” which would preclude machines from acting as inventors.The decision issued in the ’350 Application makes clear that, in the U.S., an AI does not satisfy the definition of an inventor, and in turn cannot be named as such. In this respect, the USPTO appears to align with the positions of the European Patent Office (EPO) and the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). In January of 2020, the EPO and the UKIPO denied two patent applications listing DABUS as the inventor on the ground that an AI system is not a legal personality that can be listed as the inventor (<a target="_blank" href="https://lifesciences.mofo.com/topics/AI-AN-INVENTOR-NOT-AT-THE-EUROPEAN-PATENT-OFFICE.html">see article</a>).This issue may be destined for review by the courts if the Petitioner appeals the USTPO decision. Given that AI has become a major player in innovation with advances in technology, it remains to be seen if the courts, or legislation by Congress, will take up the issue to address inventorship of inventions made using AI. In the meantime, however, only natural persons should be listed as inventors in an AI-related application in the United States. 1 Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 40 F.3d 1223 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

yuan_anna_blog_150x150.png

yuan_anna_common_640x280.jpg

yuan_anna_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

yuan_anna_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

yuan_anna_social_600x600.jpg

Of Counsel

Anna Yuan’s practice focuses on patent prosecution, IP due diligence, post-grant proceedings, and IP litigation support. 

Anna Yuan

potter_karen_blog_150x150.png

potter_karen_common_640x280.jpg

potter_karen_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

potter_karen_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

potter_karen_social_600x600.jpg

Karen Potter is a partner in Morrison & Foerster’s Life Sciences Patent group. Her practice focuses on patent preparation, prosecution, and strategic counseling for start‑up, emerging, and established

Karen G Potter Ph.D.

Karen Potter

mofolifesciences-ai-robotics.jpg

The USPTO Says No to Naming AI as a Patent Inventor

Patenting Artificial Intelligence in the U.S. – Considerations for AI Companies

mofolifesciences-ai-robotics

The increase in AI-related patent filings in the past few years has given rise to unique questions about the current patent system. In particular, the question 

The USPTO Says No to Naming AI as a Patent Inventor

Serology tests could play a critical role in the fight against COVID-19. Serology tests may help determine who can donate convalescent plasma—a part of the blood containing antibodies—which is currently being explored as an investigational treatment for those with COVID-19. Convalescent plasma has been studied in outbreaks of other respiratory infections as well, including the 2003 SARS and 2012 MERS epidemics. Recognizing this, FDA updated <a href="https://www.fda.gov/media/136798/download" target="_blank">guidance</a> regarding convalescent plasma on Friday.Read the alert on our <a target="_blank" href="https://classdismissed.mofo.com/fda/fda-updates-antibody-test-policy/">Class Dismissed blog</a>.

Fertility Center Litigation

Fitbit

MicroPort

Leading Healthcare, Pharmaceutical, and Medical Device Company

Lethal Injection Matters – Major Pharmaceutical Company

Pain Pump Matters – Large Pharmaceutical Company

Major Technology Company

Leading Chemical Company

Security Device Company

In re Air Crash Near Peixoto de Azevedo, Brazil

bosman_erin_blog_150x150.png

bosman_erin_common_640x280.jpg

bosman_erin_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

bosman_erin_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

bosman_erin_social_600x600.jpg

Co-Chair, Litigation Department

Erin Bosman is chair of MoFo’s Class Actions and Mass Torts Practice Group and is a founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence Group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin M. Bosman

Erin Bosman is the Global Co-Chair of Morrison Foerster’s Litigation Department. Erin is also the founder and co-head of the Artificial Intelligence Group and former chair of the Complex Litigation + Advisement Practice Group. Clients value her business strategy, seeking her comprehensive counsel throughout the product life cycle, especially in high-stakes litigation and product recalls.

Erin Bosman

An orthopedic implant company

A children&rsquo;s monthly subscription service product

A fertility company

A major technology company

A smart fitness equipment company

park_julie_blog_150x150.png

park_julie_common_640x280.jpg

park_julie_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

park_julie_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

park_julie_social_600x600.jpg

Julie Park provides analytic and strategic counsel for issues in product life cycle, product liability and defective products, consumer class actions, and more.

Julie Park

Julie Park | Product Liability Lawyer

Julie Park protects her clients’ products no matter what kind of product issue they face—whether it is planning for new product development, recalling an existing product, or defending clients against product liability or consumer class actions. Drawing on her deep technical and legal expertise, Julie counsels clients on consumer product safety regulation and pharmaceutical and medical device preemption while also managing complex and multijurisdictional litigation both in state and federal court.

Julie Y. Park

02_28_elc_blog_600px_v216.jpg

COVID-19 Alert: FDA updates antibody test policy

IR35 Update: UK Government Postpones “Off-Payroll Working” Reforms

02_28_elc_blog_600px_v216

Serology tests could play a critical role in the fight against COVID-19. Serology tests may help determine who can donate convalescent plasma—a part of the bloo

COVID-19 Alert: FDA updates antibody test policy

Patent applicants facing a funds shortage because of COVID-19 may be glad to hear that many patent offices have extended certain patent prosecution deadlines. For example, the <a href="https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-extends-certain-patent-and-trademark-deadlines-june-1" target="_blank">U.S. Patent Office</a> has extended various patent deadlines until June 1, 2020 and the European Patent Office has also extended certain time limits at least until June 2, 2020. A small number of jurisdictions have closed down their patent offices completely, but most are still accepting electronic filings. Jurisdictions vary wildly in the duration of the extensions, the deadlines eligible for extension, and the justification required.Given the wide variance among patent offices, it is prudent not to assume a deadline is extended due to office closures or other COVID-19 related reasons. Further, since extension policies are subject to further changes (sometimes abruptly), we advise businesses and patent practitioners to confer frequently with U.S. and foreign patent practitioners to confirm relevant extension policies are still in place. Moreover, we anticipate a heavy influx of filings once patent offices return to normal operations; the influx of filings may lead to failure in electronic filing systems, which is not an excusable delay in some jurisdictions and can lead to abandonment of patent applications. To preserve patent rights, it is prudent to address all prosecution matters by their original due dates if possible.Update: On May 27, the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Patents-Notice-CARES-Act-2020-05.pdf?utm_campaign=subscriptioncenter&utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=">U.S. Patent Office</a> further extended various patent deadlines until July 1, 2020.  Businesses and patent practitioners should continue to consult the respective patent office websites and patent counsels to confirm relevant extension policies are still in place. Should you have any questions about U.S. and foreign patent prosecution strategy, our U.S. and foreign offices are operating remotely and are ready to provide assistance.

mofolifesciences-intellectual-property.jpg

Patent Offices Extend Certain Deadlines, but Proceed With Caution

mofolifesciences-intellectual-property

Patent applicants facing a funds shortage because of COVID-19 may be glad to hear that many patent offices have extended certain patent prosecution deadlines. F

Patent Offices Extend Certain Deadlines, but Proceed With Caution

The U.S. Department of the Treasury <a style="box-sizing: border-box;color: rgb(3, 65, 147);text-decoration-line: none;transition-duration: 0.2s;transition-timing-function: ease-in-out;transition-delay: 0s;transition-property: color;font-size: 14px;" target="_blank" href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/29/2020-08916/filing-fees-for-notices-of-certain-investments-in-the-united-states-by-foreign-persons-and-certain">announced</a> that on Friday, May 1, 2020, the first-ever filing fees will become effective for joint voluntary notices submitted to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Notices submitted to CFIUS on or after May 1 will be subject to a filing fee of up to $300,000. Read our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/200430-cfius-filing-fees-become-reality.html?utm_source=publication&utm_medium=email" target="_blank">alert</a>

capito_charles_blog_150x150.png

capito_charles_common_640x280.jpg

capito_charles_heroretina_2700x1160.jpg

capito_charles_mobileretina_750x1040.jpg

capito_charles_social_600x600.jpg

Charles Capito is a partner in both Morrison Foerster’s National Security and Government Contracts + Public Procurement practices.
In the National Security space, he has significant experience couns