Enablement Inquiries

Federal Circuit Finds Prosecution History Disclaimer in Enablement Arguments

by Margareta Sorenson | Foley & Lardner LLP on 4/24/2013

In Biogen Idec, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld a narrow claim interpretation based on prosecution history disclaimer. The court held that the applicants’ arguments against an enablement rejection...more

Challenging the Enabling Quality of Prior Art

by Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff | Foley & Lardner LLP on 4/19/2013

In In re Morsa, the Federal Circuit reversed an anticipation rejection where the applicant had challenged the enabling quality of the cited prior art reference, even though the applicant had not submitted evidence in support...more

Patent Watch: In Re Morsa

by Lawrence M. Sung | BakerHostetler on 4/10/2013

On April 5, 2013, in In re Morsa, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Rader, Lourie, O'Malley*) affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences decision...more

Federal Circuit Upholds Fentora Patents, But Affirms Non-Infringement

by Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff | Foley & Lardner LLP on 2/26/2013

In Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that two Orange Book-listed patents for Cephalon’s FENTORA® product were invalid, but affirmed the district court’s...more

Patent Watch: Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

by Lawrence M. Sung | BakerHostetler on 2/20/2013

On February 14, 2013, in, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Reyna, Bryson, Wallach*) reversed-in-part and affirmed-in-part the district court's judgment following a bench trial that Watson did not infringe...more

Home

Legal News

Find a Lawyer

Browse Subjects

Subscribe

Pro Services

For Reporters

Federal Circuit Finds Prosecution History Disclaimer in Enablement Arguments

Challenging the Enabling Quality of Prior Art

Patent Watch: In Re Morsa

Federal Circuit Upholds Fentora Patents, But Affirms Non-Infringement

Patent Watch: Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

Expand Your Reach