This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Flattmann, G.J. & Kaplan, J.M. Nat. Biotechnol. 19, 683–684 (2001).
See, generally Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967 (Fed. Cir. 1995), aff'd, 517 US 370 (US 1996).
Vitronics Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc., 90 F.3d 1576, 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
66 Fed. Reg. 1099 (2001); Synopsis of Application of Written Description Guidelines.
Synopsis of Application of Written Description Guidelines at 20–22.
Structural elements in claims often narrow their scope. For instance, a claim that recites “a natural promoter” is limited to a single structure, the promoter found naturally on the chromosome. In contrast, functional elements may give claims a broader scope. For example, “a promoter capable of expression” may include a gene's natural promoter, a different promoter from that species, a viral promoter, a bacterial promoter, etc. Claiming with functional language, however, may risk invoking a “means plus function” claim construction under 35 USC §112 ¶6.
In some instances, however, the PTO will reject a more narrowly drafted claim where the claimed species is not supported by the written description.
The decision to claim more broadly and wait for a rejection to narrow the scope must be made in light of the recently decided Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 234 F.3d 56 (Fed. Cir. 2000). In Festo, scope of the doctrine of equivalents was restricted. The Festo Court held that where an applicant amends a claim for reasons relating to patentability (e.g., in response to a rejection), the amended element in that claim is entitled to no scope of equivalence.
Synopsis of Application of Written Description Guidelines at 23–26.
Id at 28–30.
Id at 34.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Flattmann, G., Kaplan, J. Patenting expressed sequence tags and single nucleotide polymorphisms. Nat Biotechnol 19, 777–779 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/90843
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/90843