Careers

Diversity

With 17 offices, from New York to Los Angeles and Seattle to Orlando, we live and work in communities all over the U.S., collaborating across locations, disciplines and even borders. Our experienced, highly ranked lawyers serve businesses wherever they are and wherever they want to go.

Offices

About Us

Pages

Professionals

Thought leadership: blogs, podcasts, videos, publications, events and news

Insights

Services

Pro Bono

Am Law 100 firm with practices in Business, Digital Assets and Data Management, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation and Tax.

Home | BakerHostetler

James Sherer Comments on Client Questions Post-Election in Law.com and The Recorder Articles

Peter Roskam and BakerHostetler’s Post-Election Webinar Mentioned in Articles on Trump’s Second Administration

Michael Snarr Comments on Tariffs and Trade Under New Administration

Sarah La Voi, Lauren Bass Pen Article for The Licensing Journal on Morals Clause

<figure class="wp-block-image alignright size-large is-resized"><img decoding="async" src="https://ipintelligencereport.bakerhostetlerblogs.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2022/11/Supreme-Court-Washington-DC-GettyImages-90312691-1200x630-72dpi-600x315.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-5891" width="428"></figure>
The Supreme Court has granted Amgen’s Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, agreeing to address what it means to provide an enabling disclosure. In particular, Amgen asked the Court to address:

Whether enablement is governed by the statutory requirement that the specification teach those skilled in the art to “make and use” the claimed invention, 35 U.S.C. §112, or whether it must instead enable those skilled in the art “to reach the full scope of claimed embodiments” without undue experimentation—i.e., to cumulatively identify and make all or nearly all embodiments of the invention without substantial “time and effort.”

Section 112 of the Patent Act requires a patent’s specification to “enable any person skilled in the art… to make and use” the patented invention. 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). In <em>Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC</em>, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of Judgment as a Matter of Law of lack of enablement, finding that “after weighing the <em>Wands</em> factors, the [district] court did not err in concluding that undue experimentation would be required to practice the full scope of these claims.” 987 F.3d 1080, 1088 (Fed. Cir. 2021). Amgen has requested that the Supreme Court clarify whether enablement requires that the specification:
<ul>
 	<li>Teach those skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention using the “roadmap” provided in the specification; or</li>
 	<li>Enable those skilled in the art to practice the full scope of the claimed invention without undue experimentation.</li>
</ul>
This case is sure to be closely watched by those in the biologics space, where claiming a molecule based upon its “function” is a common claim strategy.

Supreme Court to Address What it Means to Have an Enabling Disclosure

Featured Insights

Related Services

Featured Insights