In Duke University v. Sandoz Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a $39M jury verdict, holding the patent claim invalid for failing to meet §112’s written description requirement for a claimed chemical
In Merck Serono v. Hopewell, the Federal Circuit clarifies how “by another” applies when prior art and challenged patent share overlapping inventors under pre‑AIA §§ 102(a) and (e).
In FMC v. Sharda, the Federal Circuit vacated a TRO, finding that the term “composition” should not include a stability requirement omitted from the final patent.
In Mondis v. LG, the Federal Circuit ruled that the patent's written description failed to support amended claims, invalidating key computer display claims.
