Skip to main content

Nixon Peabody LLP

  • People
  • Capabilities
  • Insights
  • About
Trending Topics
    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni
    Practices

    View All

    • Affordable Housing
    • Community Development Finance
    • Corporate & Finance
    • Cybersecurity & Privacy
    • Entertainment & Media
    • Environmental
    • Franchising & Distribution
    • Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
    • Healthcare
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Services
    • Labor, Employment, and Benefits
    • Litigation
    • Private Wealth & Advisory
    • Project Finance
    • Public Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Regulatory & Government Relations
    Industries

    View All

    • Aviation
    • Cannabis
    • Consumer
    • Energy
    • Financial Services
    • Healthcare
    • Higher Education
    • Infrastructure
    • Manufacturing
    • Nonprofit Organizations
    • Real Estate
    • Sports & Stadiums
    • Technology
    Value-Added Services

    View All

    • Alternative Fee Arrangements

      Developing innovative pricing structures and alternative fee agreement models that deliver additional value for our clients.

    • Continuing Education

      Advancing professional knowledge and offering credits for attorneys, staff and other professionals.

    • Crisis Advisory

      Helping clients respond correctly when a crisis occurs.

    • DEI Strategic Services

      Providing our clients with legal, strategic, and practical advice to make transformational changes in their organizations.

    • eDiscovery

      Leveraging law and technology to deliver sound solutions.

    • Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG)

      We help clients create positive return on investments in people, products, and the planet.

    • Global Services

      Delivering seamless service through partnerships across the globe.

    • Innovation

      Leveraging leading-edge technology to guide change and create seamless, collaborative experiences for clients and attorneys.

    • IPED

      Industry-leading conferences focused on affordable housing, tax credits, and more.

    • Legal Project Management

      Providing actionable information to support strategic decision-making.

    • Legally Green

      Teaming with clients to advance sustainable projects, mitigate the effects of climate change, and protect our planet.

    • Nixon Peabody Trust Company

      Offering a range of investment management and fiduciary services.

    • NP Capital Connector

      Bringing together companies and investors for tomorrow’s new deals.

    • NP Second Opinion

      Offering fresh insights on cases that are delayed, over budget, or off-target from the desired resolution.

    • NP Trial

      Courtroom-ready lawyers who can resolve disputes early on clients’ terms or prevail at trial before a judge or jury.

    • Social Impact

      Creating positive impact in our communities through increasing equity, access, and opportunity.

    • Women in Dealmaking

      We provide strategic counsel on complex corporate transactions and unite dynamic women in the dealmaking arena.

    1. Home
    2. Insights
    3. Alerts
    4. SCOTUS reiterates disclosures needed to meet enablement requirement

      Alerts

    Alert / Intellectual Property

    SCOTUS reiterates disclosures needed to meet enablement requirement

    May 23, 2023

    LinkedInX (Twitter)EmailCopy URL

    By Linda Huber and David Resnick

    The ruling in Amgen v. Sanofi shows that efforts to preempt the field will require correlative teachings for a claimed invention to meet the enablement requirement.

    What’s the impact?

    • Patent seekers should reevaluate their patent portfolios to ensure patent claims meet the enablement standard reiterated by the U.S. Supreme Court.
    • New patent applications should be drafted with structure-based claims. If claims require functional language, ensure that the claims do not preempt the field.

    DOWNLOAD

    Read more about patent enablement requirements

    On May 18, 2023, in a unanimous decision delivered by Justice Gorsuch, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et al., affirmed district court and the Federal Circuit decisions and held that Amgen’s functionally defined patent claims were invalid under the enablement requirement, 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), as the specification failed to provide adequate guidance to enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the invention.

    The Amgen patent was directed at a broad class of cholesterol-lowering monoclonal antibodies that bind to and inhibit the action of PCSK9, a protein associated with high cholesterol levels. The Amgen patent used functional language to assist in describing the class of antibodies. Both Amgen and Sanofi market anti-PCSK9 antibodies. Amgen sued Sanofi for patent infringement, prompting Sanofi to countersue for invalidity for failure to meet the enablement requirement.

    In its decision, the Supreme Court referenced some classic patent law decisions: Morse, Incandescent Lamp, and Holland Furniture, stating:

    “If a patent claims an entire class of processes, machines, manufactures, or compositions of matter, the patent’s specification must enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the entire class. In other words, the specification must enable the full scope of the invention as defined by its claims. The more one claims, the more one must enable.”

    This might appear to be an increased burden to satisfy the enablement standard. Fear not, the Supreme Court reiterated Incandescent Lamp’s recognition that not “every single embodiment within a claimed class” needs to be described with particularity; “it may suffice to give an example (or a few examples) if the specification also discloses “some general quality…running through” the class that gives it “a peculiar fitness for the particular purpose.” (Internal citations omitted.) Further, “a specification [is not] necessarily inadequate just because it leaves the skilled artist to engage in some measure of adaptation or testing.” The Supreme Court summed up that “[w]hat is reasonable [experimentation] in any case will depend on the nature of the invention and the underlying art.”

    The antibody field was viewed by the Supreme Court as having a very high level of unpredictability. Thus, the corollary need is to include extensive and detailed teachings to show that only a reasonable amount of experimentation (i.e., no undue experimentation) is needed to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention.

    Takeaways for patent seekers and patentees

    Where does this decision leave patent seekers and patentees? The following are considerations to keep in mind:

    Application drafting

    Work with your patent attorney to ensure that the invention, to the extent it is possible, is claimed only by its structural features. If functional features need to be used, ensure that the claim does not preempt the field and consider whether there is “some general quality . . . running through” the class that gives it “a peculiar fitness for the particular purpose.” That is, seek to determine if there are any structure-function relationships that can be described.

    Existing applications

    Review the claims to determine whether functional limitations are needed to claim the invention. If the antibodies (or similar compositions) can be sufficiently claimed by their structure, consider removing those functional limitations, as they require yet another layer of experimentation to test for the presence of those functions. Also, consider whether structure-function relationships are supported by the existing specification and add those into the claims if structure alone is not sufficient.

    Allowed patent claims

    Consider filing continuing applications to pursue claims without functional limitations, pursue claims using structure-function relationships if functional language is needed, or pursue claims that are intermediate in scope that may better withstand enablement challenges.

    Issued patents without a pending continuing application

    Carefully consider filing a reissue application to obtain reissue claims better situated to withstand invalidity challenges and reopen prosecution for further narrower continuing applications to shore up patent protection.

    Offensive

    Review and monitor competitors’ patents for potential weaknesses and consider initiating invalidly challenges.

    Practices

    Intellectual PropertyLife Sciences

    Insights And Happenings

    • Alert

      Global greenwashing update

      Nov 8, 2023
    • Alert

      Recent executive order prioritizes domestic innovation and manufacturing

      Aug 21, 2023
    • Alert

      SCOTUS clarifies recovery of extraterritorial damages under Lanham Act

      July 7, 2023
    The foregoing has been prepared for the general information of clients and friends of the firm. It is not meant to provide legal advice with respect to any specific matter and should not be acted upon without professional counsel. If you have any questions or require any further information regarding these or other related matters, please contact your regular Nixon Peabody LLP representative. This material may be considered advertising under certain rules of professional conduct.

    Subscribe to stay informed of the latest legal news, alerts, and business trends.Subscribe

    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni
    • Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Statement of Client Rights
    • Purchase Order Terms & Conditions
    • Nixon Peabody International LLC
    • PAL
    © 2025 Nixon Peabody. All rights reserved