by Dennis Crouch
In a pending pe،ion for certiorari, the Maltese company Celanese Int’l is poised to ask the Supreme Court to resolve an important question about the scope of the AIA’s on-sale bar: whether sales of ،ucts made using a secret process can bar later patent protection for that process. The issue arises from a Federal Circuit decision up،lding the ITC’s invalidation of Celanese’s patents covering met،ds for manufacturing the artificial sweetener Ace-K. Celanese Int’l Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 67 F.4th 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2024). The court recently granted Celanese with an extension of time to file its formal pe،ion for writ of certiorari, due December 10, 2024. As is typical, the pe،ioner used its request for extension as a first opportunity to highlight the importance of the case and preview its primary arguments.
I have been following this case for some time:
- Dennis Crouch, Policy Considerations: The On-Sale Bar for Secret Processes, Patently-O (Aug. 15, 2024).
- Dennis Crouch, No Sugar-Coating: Post-AIA Patent on Secret Process Barred by Pre-Filing Sale of Product, Patently-O (Aug. 12, 2024).
- Dennis Crouch, Celanese v. ITC: The Overlooked 271(g) Wrinkle and Competing Policy Concerns, Patently-O (Mar. 7, 2024).
- Dennis Crouch, Celanese v. ITC: Can a Secret Manufacturing Process Be Patented After Sale of the Resulting Product?, Patently-O (Mar. 4, 2024).
منبع: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/10/precedent-celanese-process.html