A Patent Doctrine without Bounds: The "Extended" Written Description Requirement

Whitley, Guang Ming
March 2004
University of Chicago Law Review;Spring2004, Vol. 71 Issue 2, p617
Academic Journal
The article presents information on the patent doctrine in the United States. Valid patents must fulfill: "written description" and "enablement." Traditionally, the written description requirement served as a priority policing doctrine, preventing patent applicants from improperly amending claims after submitting an initial application. In this way, the written description requirement foiled attempts to add new matter to a patent through the amendment process while retaining the benefit of an earlier filing date.


Related Articles

  • STICKY KNOWLEDGE AND COPYRIGHT. Chon, Margaret // Wisconsin Law Review;2011, Vol. 2011 Issue 2, p177 

    Knowledge is sticky because it adheres to people along social routes, lodged within relational and collective modalities, as well as through copyright's proverbial fixed works that can be transacted more freely. Sticky knowledge may in fact constitute a much larger body of knowledge than we...

  • Comparing and evaluating public research organisations: a unique, participatory mechanism in place in France. Esterle, Laurence // Research Evaluation;Aug2005, Vol. 14 Issue 2, p129 

    A cooperative mechanism, comprising a representative steering committee, an independent operator and working groups from thematic areas, has constructed indicators suited to the French situation. Demographic analyses, bibliometric indicators of scientific output, measurement of copublications...

  • Grace periods and patentability. Soames, Candi // Nature Reviews Drug Discovery;Apr2006, Vol. 5 Issue 4, p275 

    Recent patent case law has indicated that there is a trend for more experimental support in patent applications. However, having to publish such research could delay filing and undermine the novelty of the invention, whereas not publishing the work in a competitive research environment could...

  • Patent trolls: No work and all play. Bairstow, Jeffrey // Laser Focus World;May2011, Vol. 47 Issue 5, p112 

    The author discusses the concept of 'patent troll.' He discusses the meaning of 'patent troll' that refers to companies that buy and sell patents without an intention of using those rights themselves. He recalls the history of patent trolling, which possibly dates back to 1993, to describe...

  • IN RE CURTIS.  // Berkeley Technology Law Journal;Annual Review 2005, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p177 

    The article informs that the U.S. Federal Circuit held that when the evidence indicates persons having ordinary skill in the relevant art cannot predict the operability in the invention of any species other than the one disclosed, a patentee will not be deemed to have invented species sufficient...

  • Patent Pushback. Seidenberg, Steven // ABA Journal;Dec2007, Vol. 93 Issue 12, p14 

    The article discusses a string of decisions issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit since late August 2007 that are bad news for patent-holders and applicants. Underwater Devices Inc. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co. made it much harder to patentees to recover treble damages against...

  • Trends and Volatilities in Heterogeneous Patent Quality in Taiwan. Wen-Cheng Lu; Jong-Rong Chen; I-Hsuan Tung // Journal of Technology Management & Innovation;2009, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p69 

    This study analyzes patent trends and volatilities for three heterogeneous quality patents in the Taiwan patent system from January 1973 to June 2006. The estimated models are symmetric GARCH (1,1) and asymmetric EGARCH (1,1), providing full sample, rolling sample, and out-of-sample evidence....

  • CARTELS AND ENEMY PROPERTY. BERMAN, HERBERT A. // Law & Contemporary Problems;Winter/Spring1945, Vol. 11 Issue 1, p109 

    The article discusses the international cartel agreements that affect the administration of enemy property in the U.S. It states that cartel continue to pose problems in the administration, if the barriers imposed by cartels do not prevent the vesting of the enemy owned property. Cartels may...

  • COMMENT: Do not allow OLED technology to be stifled.  // Electronics Weekly;11/24/2004, Issue 2172, p3 

    This article reports that the possession of a patent for OLED display technology may be potentially good news for BTG, but the flat panel industry may find itself paying a high price if the development of next generation OLEDs is not to be restricted. They either try to' own' the technology by...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics