Opinion ID: 2799273
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: conclusion

Text: We conclude that as a result of the transfer we have jurisdiction under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 141 to hear Biogen’s appeal. This is so because the AIA eliminated district courts’ subject matter jurisdiction under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 146 to review decisions in interference proceedings declared after September 15, 2012. We therefore decline to transfer this case back to the district court. On the merits, we conclude that the Board did not err in entering judgment against Fiers on the basis of interference estoppel because Fiers did not discharge its burden in response to the Board’s show cause order to provide evidence of the patentable distinctness of its hFIF protein claims over the DNA sequences encoding for such proteins. Biogen’s request for retransfer is: DENIED The Board’s decision is: AFFIRMED BIOGEN IDEC MA, INC. v. JAPANESE FOUNDATION FOR CANCER 25 COSTS Costs to appellees.