Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Patently Obvious
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Patently ObviousCAFC Applies Lilly to Invalidate Carnegie Mellon?s Plasmid Claims
By Dennis Crouch, Esq.
ADVERTISEMENTS
Carnegie Mellon University v. Hoffman-La Roche (Fed. Cir. 2008)
Carnegie Mellon's patents cover recombinant plasmids used to enhance expression of an DNA polymerase. On appeal, the CAFC affirmed the lower court holding that the patent claims fail to meet the written description requirement under Lilly.
35 U.S.C. §112 requires that the patent document "contain a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact term read more
Full post as published by Patently Obvious on September 08, 2008 (boomark / email).
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

The reliance of the Carnegie-Mellon court on Eli Lilly
Carnegie Mellon Professor Arrested Three Times in Eight Days for Drunk Driving
Redefining the Book: Carnegie Mellon and Lulu.com Team Up
Carnegie-Mellon loses big time for failure of written description
Disclosure of gene from one bacterial source cannot support claims to gene from any bacterial source









