直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 我们的专业人员
  • 服务
  • 我们的见解
  • 办公室
  • 事务所
  • 人才招聘
Finnegan
  • 新闻
  • 飞翰事实
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • 慈善性法律援助
  • 管理层
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Charles T. Collins-Chase

Federal Circuit Dismisses Consumer Organization’s Appeal against Finnegan Client Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation for Lack of Standing

June 4, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 4, 2014

Contact:    Kara F. Stoll, Partner

                    Email

Federal Circuit Dismisses Consumer Organization’s Appeal against Finnegan Client Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation for Lack of Standing

 

WASHINGTON, DC — On Wednesday, June 4, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed for lack of Article III standing an appeal against Finnegan client Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) brought by consumer-advocacy organization Consumer Watchdog (CW). The dismissal preserves the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that all claims of WARF’s U.S. Patent No. 7,029,913 (the ’913 patent) directed to human embryonic stem cell cultures are patentable.

The appeal arose from an inter partes reexamination filed by CW. Following years of reexamination, the PTAB found the ’913 patent claims patentable over the asserted prior art. CW then appealed to the Federal Circuit, where Finnegan as appellate counsel countered CW’s assertions that the claims were both invalid over the prior art and directed to ineligible subject matter. However, in a case of first impression, the Court agreed with WARF and amici the United States and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that CW lacked standing to pursue its appeal. The Federal Circuit concluded that CW’s disagreement with the PTAB did not invade any legal right conferred by the inter partes reexamination statute and that CW had not identified any particularized, concrete interest in the patentability of the ’913 patent as, for example, a competitor, licensee, or stem-cell researcher. Because CW did not identify a particularized, concrete interest in the patentability of the ’913 patent, or any injury in fact flowing from the Board’s decision, the Court dismissed its appeal for lack of standing.

About Finnegan

With more than 350 intellectual property lawyers, Finnegan is one of the largest IP law firms in the world. From offices in Atlanta, Boston, Palo Alto, Reston, London, Shanghai, Taipei, Tokyo, and Washington, DC, the firm practices all aspects of patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret law, including counseling, prosecution, licensing, and litigation. Finnegan also represents clients on IP issues related to international trade, portfolio management, the Internet, e-commerce, government contracts, antitrust, and unfair competition. For additional information on the firm, please visit www.finnegan.com. Follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter.

###

Related Professionals

William B. Raich, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4210
Email

Related News

Commentary

New Appellate Opinion in Amazon Biometric Data Case May Signal ‘Narrowing’ Scope of BIPA Litigation, Experts Say

May 20, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Partner Antje Brambrink Shortlisted for Women in Business Law EMEA Award

May 13, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Decisive ITC Victory for Innoscience in Final Determination

May 11, 2026

Commentary

ITC Bars Import of Innoscience Chips Made Before Redesign

May 8, 2026

Award/Ranking

Associates Rank Finnegan “Best of the Best” in BTI Associate Satisfaction Survey

May 7, 2026

Award/Ranking

61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll

May 7, 2026

Commentary

How Litigation Funding Disclosure Could Affect ITC Cases

May 7 , 2026

Commentary

Justices to Side with Generic Drugmakers in Patent Spat, Attorneys Predict

May 5, 2026

Announcement

Finnegan Partner Ningling Wang Becomes President of Licensing Executives Society International

May 4, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • 隐私
  • 免责申明
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP