Gretchen L. Temeles authored the article, “The Next Cannabis? Patent Protection for Psychedelic Therapeutics,” for The Legal Intelligencer.
Dr. Temeles writes:
Along with cannabis, the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 designated many psychedelic compounds as Schedule I controlled substances. Schedule I controlled substances are considered to have no legitimate medical use and their possession and sale is illegal under U.S. federal law. Recent efforts to legalize psychedelics have followed in the wake of legalization of medical and recreational cannabis by multiple states. In the last two years, Denver, Colorado, and Oakland and Santa Cruz, California, decriminalized possession of psilocybin-containing mushrooms and/or plants having psychedelic properties. In February 2020, the Washington, D.C., Board of Elections decided to advance an initiative to decriminalize possession of any plant or fungus containing psilocybin and other psychedelic compounds. At the same time, scientific researchers have been looking at old research in a new light. The FDA has even shown willingness to support approval of psychedelic therapeutics. The renewed interest in psychedelics has spawned an increase in commercial activity and an increase in the number of patent applications and granted patents covering psychedelics.
To read the full article, visit the Duane Morris website.
In this second article of his Cannabis Patent Review series, Duane Morris partner Vince Capuano reports on recently granted U.S. patents in various areas of cannabis technology.
There are plenty of reports and testimonials on the medical benefits of cannabis. Time, and better data, will determine whether these benefits are realized, and whether some are overblown, and the U.S. FDA will decide when the therapeutic uses of cannabinoids are safe and effective, and approvable for human use in the U.S. The FDA has approved CBD (cannabidiol), the principal non-psychoactive constituent in cannabis, for the treatment of certain types of seizures. The approval of Epidiolex (NDA Approval Holder: GW Research Ltd.) brings the therapeutic use of CBD as an active drug substance within the jurisdiction of the FDA. Thus, because CBD is the active drug substance in an FDA-approved pharmaceutical (Epidiolex), the FDA is currently considering regulations for the testing and approval for all drug products containing CBD.
Read Mr. Capuano’s full analysis on this topic.
Read Part 1 in the series.
In this first article of his Cannabis Patent Review series, Duane Morris partner Vince Capuano reports on the patenting of technology related to cannabis extraction and cannabinoid purifications.
One of the more active areas in the patenting of cannabis technology in 2019 is the related fields of cannabis extraction and cannabinoid purification. Cannabis operators now must educate themselves and navigate an emerging landscape of U.S. cannabis extraction and purification patents for freedom to operate, while also looking for opportunities to patent their own innovations. So far in 2019, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has granted over 30 patents with claims directed to cannabis extraction technologies and many others related to distillation of cannabinoid components and techniques for obtaining active compounds from marijuana and hemp. Dozens more are pending.
Read Mr. Capuano’s full analysis on this topic.
How much marijuana is really in that pot brownie? Chocolate can throw off potency tests so labels aren’t always accurate, and now scientists are trying to figure out why.
In states where marijuana is legal, pot comes in cookies, mints, gummies, protein bars — even pretzels. These commercial products are labeled with the amount of high-inducing THC. That helps medical marijuana patients get the desired dose and other consumers attune their buzz.
But something about chocolate, chemists say, seems to interfere with potency testing. A chocolate labeled as 10 milligrams of THC could have far more and send someone to the emergency room with hallucinations.
Scores of cannabis-related inventions have received U.S. patents, said [Duane Morris partner] Vincent Capuano, who holds a doctorate in organic chemistry. Inventors have patented ways of putting cannabis into milk, coffee pods, ice pops and chewing gum.
“There’s a lot of flash and hipness, snake oil and marketing. But there’s still a lot of real chemical advance happening,” Capuano said of the industry. “It’s right in center field for chemists.”
To read the full article, visit the AP News website.
Duane Morris partner Vincent Capuano was featured in “Making Your Mark & Protecting It” in the July issue of Marijuana Business Magazine. Vince discussed when it makes sense to seek a patent for your product.
Cannabis Wire discussed the Duane Morris webinar, Cannabis 202: IP Issues Facing the Cannabis Industry: Hot Topics in Patent, Trademark and Branding Protection and Enforcement.
The publication writes:
The 2018 Farm Bill, which legalized hemp in the U.S., has triggered an avalanche of applications for cannabis patents and trademarks.
Last Tuesday, Duane Morris, an international law firm headquartered in Philadelphia, hosted a webinar on intellectual property concerns as they relate to the cannabis industry. Early on, the presenters made two things clear: one, there is an unprecedented rush for cannabis patents, and two, how property rights in the industry will be divvied up remains up in the air. The lawyers presented a patent and trademark landscape that the industry needs to understand, but one in which the rules are very much in formation.
For more information, visit the Cannabis Wire website or view a replay of the webinar.
Getting a patent for a cannabis product is no more difficult than getting a patent for any other kind of product. However, with a high number of cannabis patent applications being approved, it is likely that many will be challenged for invalidation in the coming years.
Already one of these patents has gone to court in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. In United Cannabis v. Pure Hemp Collective, United Cannabis Corp. claims that Pure Hemp Collective Inc. used a cannabis extract that United Cannabis had a patent on. Pure Hemp filed a motion for partial summary judgment, arguing United Cannabis should not have had a patent on the extract because it was something that occurred naturally. In April, U.S. District Judge William Martinez found the strain was altered and would not have occurred naturally and denied the motion for partial summary judgment. The case is still pending..
To read the full text of this article including Duane Morris Attorney Vince Capuano, please visit the Duane Morris website.
Reprinted with permission from law.com, © ALM Media Properties LLC. All rights reserved.