Carnegie Mellon University v. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the narrow description of the E. coli polA gene did not adequately support a broad claim to the gene from any bacterial source
• holding that the narrow description of the E. coli polA gene did not adequately support a broad claim to the gene from any bacterial source
• holding that the narrow description of the E. coli polA gene did not adequately support a broad claim to the gene from any bacterial source
• holding that the narrow description of the E. coli polA gene did not adequately support a broad claim to the gene from any bacterial source
• holding that specification that only discloses “the polA gene coding sequence from one bacterial source ... fails to disclose or describe the polA gene coding sequence for any other bacterial species.”
• “finding that Tag is an equivalent of E. coli would essentially render the ‘bacterial source [is] E. coli’ claim limitation meaningless, and would thus vitiate that limitation of the claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).