Opinion
Nos. 2006-1634, 2006-1649.
December 19, 2008. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied February 9, 2009.
Chief Judge Michel and Circuit Judge Schall did not participate in the vote.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in Case No. 04-CV-2607, Judge William D. Quarles, Jr.
Joseph J. Zito, Zito tip, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant.
Joshua M. Hiller, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Boston, MA, for defendant-appellee, Biogen IDEC. On the brief were David B. Bassett, of New York, NY, 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, DE, 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, NY; and Edward W. Murray and Mary J. Morry, Merck Co., Inc., of Rahway, NJ.
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 "transform[] a particular article into a different state or thing." Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.