Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Patents
  • Published:

Is the viability of the Lilly doctrine on the decline?

Nature Biotechnology volume 21, pages 943–944 (2003)Cite this article

The Federal Circuit's limited application of the Lilly disclosure rule could greatly simplify the drafting of biotechnology patent applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Moba, B.V. v. Diamond Automation, Inc., 325 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

  2. Regents of the University of California v. Eli Lilly & Co., 119 F.3d 1559 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

  3. 35 USC §112, ∥1.

  4. Mueller, J.M. The evolving application of the written description requirement to biotechnological inventions. Berkeley Tech.L.J. 13, 615–621 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  5. In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737 (Fed. Cir. 1989).

  6. US Patent No.4,652,525.

  7. See Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 USC §112, ¶1, Written Description Requirement, Fed. Reg. 66, 1099–1111.

  8. Enzo Biochem Inc. v. Gen-Probe, Inc., 285 F.3d 1013 (Fed. Cir. 2002).

  9. Enzo Biochem Inc. v. Gen-Probe, Inc., 296 F.3d 1316, 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2002).

  10. Amgen Inc., v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 314 F.3d 1313, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Sherry M Carty: Sherry M Carty is at Burns, Doane, Swecker & Mathis, 1009 Slater Road, Suite 210, Durham, North Carolina 27703, USA. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not of Burns, Doane or its clients.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Burns, Doane, Swecker & Mathis, 1737 King Street, Alexandria, 22314-2727, Virginia, USA

    Barbara Webb Walker

Authors
  1. Barbara Webb Walker
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sherry M Carty
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Webb Walker, B., Carty, S. Is the viability of the Lilly doctrine on the decline?. Nat Biotechnol 21, 943–944 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0803-943

Download citation

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0803-943

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing