Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the standard for determining the adequacy of the "written description of the invention" should be as the statute says—that the description must be "in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains * * * to make and use the same"—or whether court-created standards should control instead.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the standard for determining the adequacy of the 'written description of the invention' should be as the statute says—that the description must be 'in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains * * * to make and use the same'—or whether court-created standards should control instead
2018-12-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-12-04
Reply of petitioners Amgen Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2018-11-19
Brief of respondents Sanofi, et al. in opposition filed.
2018-09-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 19, 2018
2018-09-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 18, 2018 to November 17, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-09-18
Response Requested. (Due October 18, 2018)
2018-09-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-08-27
Brief amici curiae of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Morphosys AG, Bavarian Nordic A/S, and UCB Biopharma SPRL filed.
2018-07-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 27, 2018)
2018-05-14
Application (17A1262) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until July 23, 2018.
2018-05-11
Application (17A1262) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 24, 2018 to July 23, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.