The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Thursday upheld the District of Delaware’s grant of judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) that Amgen’s patent claims covering its Repatha cholesterol treatment were invalid for lack of enablement. The court found that Amgen’s composition claims were defined by meeting functional limitations, rather than by structure, and that the patent specifications didn’t enable the preparation of the full scope of the claims without undue experimentation. Judge Lourie authored the opinion. Amgen v. Sanofi (CAFC, Feb. 11, 2020)
Federal Circuit Says Amgen’s Repatha® Patent Claims Require ‘Undue Experimentation’ to Practice
No Comments
Enablement
- Federal Circuit Says Amgen’s Repatha® Patent Claims Require ‘Undue Experimentation’ to Practice
- Implications of Filing Subsequent Patent Applications in the United States (Part III)
- AAM v. Neapco Misreads Federal Circuit Precedent to Create a New Section 101 Enablement-like Legal Requirement – Part II
- New Enablement-Like Requirements for 101 Eligibility: AAM v. Neapco Takes the Case Law Out of Context, and Too Far – Part I
- An Emerging Section 101 Expansion to Section 112(a) Enablement? The Federal Circuit Should Stop It Now
Recent Posts
- Balancing Innovation and Competition: Thomas Jefferson’s View of Obviousness for Mechanical Inventions
- Design Patents: Under Utilized and Overlooked
- Deciding Where to Obtain International Patent Rights
- The New Copyright Small Claims Board Presents Problems for Copyright Owners and Small Businesses
- From Home Security to VoIP: Honoring Black Women Inventors of the Last Half-Century