Carol Jean Womack v. Edwards Zubizarrreta Partnership

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that in certain circumstances, the deposit of biological materials can satisfy the enablement requirement
• holding that a deposit of biological materials can satisfy the enablement requirement if there is sufficient teaching in the specification about how to use the materials on deposit to make the claimed invention
• holding that whether undue experimentation is required is a “conclusion reached by weighing many factual considerations. . . . includ[ing] (1) the quantity of experimentation necessary, (2) the amount of direction or guidance presented, (3
• noting that the determination is not a “simple factual determination, but rather is a conclusion reached by weighing many factual considerations”
• noting that the state of the art and level of skill are factors to be considered in the enablement decision
• noting that the predictability of the art is one factor to consider in determining enablement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).