|
|
Article: Written Description - A Must Or Not?
- Article from:
- Mondaq Business Briefing
- Article date:
- December 21, 2004
CopyrightCOPYRIGHT 2004 Mondaq Ltd. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information)
|
Originally published December 17, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit strongly reaffirmed a patentee's obligation to provide a written description in a patent to comply with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. s.112 [micro]1. The Federal Circuit rendered this decision in University of Rochester v. G.D. Searle & Co.[i] Specifically, the Federal Circuit upheld the Federal District Court for the Western District of New York's decision[ii] to invalidate the University of Rochester's patent[iii] based on the patentee's failure to comply with the written description requirement of s.112. This ...
Related newspaper, magazine, and journal articles:
|
|
Article: Confirming the Written-Description Requirement as a ...
Mondaq Business Briefing;
October 5, 2004 ;
700+ words
... ... members of the Federal Circuit have questioned ... imposes a written-description requirement ... viability of the written-description requirement ... whether the Federal Circuit would continue ... separate written-description requirement under the Federal ...
|
|