Plant Genetic Systems, N v. (Now Known as Aventis Cropscience n.v.), and Biogen, Inc. v. Dekalb Genetics Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Hogan held that “one could not use later-existing states of the art to invalidate a patent that was enabled for what it claimed at the time of filing”
• stating that en-ablement is determined as of the effective filing date of the patent
• noting that enablement, or utility, is determined as of the application filing date
• noting that enablement, or utility, is determined as of the application filing date
• finding transformed monocot cells needed to be enabled because they were not an unknown concept as of the priority date
• finding the trial court properly used post-1987 reports as evidence of the state of the art in 1987

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).