Tag Archives: Written Description

Federal Circuit Finds No Written Description for "Analogs"

In Boston Scientific Corp. v. Johnson & Johnson, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s determination that a series of stent patents are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112, first paragraph. The claims at issue recite stents that elute certain rapamycin “analogs,” but the patents did not … Continue reading this entry

Diagnostic Test For Genetic Mutation Fails Written Description Requirement Where Mutation Was Not Disclosed

In Billups-Rothenberg, Inc. v. Associated Regional And University Pathologists, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of invalidity based on a lack of written description. The claims at issue were directed to methods of diagnosing a disease by detecting a specific genetic mutation associated with that disease, but the patent … Continue reading this entry

Join Me In a Telebriefing Seminar on Centocor

On Thursday, March 31, at 3:00 PM Eastern Time (12:00 PM Pacific Time), I will be speaking during a Law Seminars International TeleBriefing titled “Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories,” discussing the impact of the Federal Circuit’s recent decision. The panel consists of: Donald L. Zuhn, Ph.D, Esq., McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP, … Continue reading this entry

A Tale of Two Antibodies (Centocor Part II)

As I wrote last week, the Federal Circuit held in Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, that the human antibody claims that Centocor had asserted against Abbott’s Humira® product are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112. The holding is getting lots of attention because it will negate a … Continue reading this entry

The Written Description Requirement for Antibodies (Centocor Part I)

Yesterday, in Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, the Federal Circuit held that the human antibody claims that Centocor had asserted against Abbott’s Humira® product (claims 2, 3, 14 and 15 of U.S. 7,070,775) are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112. (This decision will negate a $1.67 billion damages … Continue reading this entry