The Federal Circuit’s decision in Juno v. Kite undermines effective prosecution practice and ultimately patent enforcement. The Juno panel held that to satisfy the written description requirement, a patent needs to demonstrate to a skilled artisan that the inventors possessed and disclosed in their filing the full scope of every genus being claimed. By denying rehearing to the Federal Circuit’s 2021 decision on the scope of the written description requirement, Juno v. Kite demonstrates how once again, the courts never consider anything from a prosecutor’s point of view. Here’s why Juno v. Kite is bad for patent prosecution practice.
Recent Posts
- Witnesses Tell Senate IP Subcommittee They Must Get NO FAKES Act Right
- Commerce Department Announces NIST and USPTO Actions on AI
- FCC Restores Net Neutrality Regime Amid Criticism
- Other Barks and Bites for Friday, April 26: World Intellectual Property Day Celebrated Around the Globe; China Tops List for AI Patents Granted; EPO Releases Cleantech Study on World IP Day
- Celebrating World IP Day: Is the Innovative Future Sustainable?