Single Species Does Not Provide Written Description Support For Genus
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.11.08
In In re Kenneth Alonso (No. 2008-1079; October 30, 2008), the Federal Circuit affirms a final decision of the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences ("the Board") holding that appellant's method claim, which is directed to treating a neurofibrosarcoma in a patient by administering a monoclonal antibody targeted to the patient's tumor, is enabled but invalid for lack of written description.
The Board reversed the Examiner's rejection of appellant's method claim for lack of enablement but sustained the rejection based on lack of adequate written description. The Board determined that the single antibody described in appellant's specification is insufficiently representative to provide adequate written descriptive support for the genus of antibodies required to practice the claimed method. The Court agrees, stating that in addition to the "representative number of species" test applied by the Board, adequate written description may also be found where the disclosure specifies relevant identifying characteristics such as complete or partial structure or other physical and/or chemical properties, functional characteristics when coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, or some combination of such characteristics. Although appellant argues that there is a well known correlation between the structure and function of the antibodies generated by his disclosed method, the Federal Circuit states that appellant did not raise the structure-function correlation argument during proceedings before the Board and therefore refuses to consider appellant's "newly minted" argument on appeal.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 12.13.24
New FTC Telemarketing Sales Rule Amendments
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) recently announced that it approved final amendments to its Telemarketing Sales Rule (“TSR”), broadening the rule’s coverage to inbound calls for technical support (“Tech Support”) services. For example, if a Tech Support company presents a pop-up alert (such as one that claims consumers’ computers or other devices are infected with malware or other problems) or uses a direct mail solicitation to induce consumers to call about Tech Support services, that conduct would violate the amended TSR.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 12.10.24
Fast Lane to the Future: FCC Greenlights Smarter, Safer Cars
Client Alert | 6 min read | 12.09.24
Eleven States Sue Asset Managers Alleging ESG Conspiracy to Restrict Coal Production
Client Alert | 3 min read | 12.09.24
New York Department of Labor Issues Guidance Regarding Paid Prenatal Leave, Taking Effect January 1