The Lilly Written Description Requirement: A Doctrinal Wildcard of Uncertain Effect

Research Handbook on Patent Law & Theory (2nd Edition), ISBN: 978-1-78536-411-2, Edward Elgar, 2019

33 Pages Posted: 2 Jun 2020

See all articles by Christopher M. Holman

Christopher M. Holman

University of Missouri - Kansas City School of Law

Date Written: 2016

Abstract

Section 112 of the US Patent Statute provides the statutory basis for two discrete doctrines of patentability: the enablement and written description requirements. In 1997, a panel of the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) charted new doctrinal waters in Regents of the University of California v. Eli Lilly & Co. recognizing for the first time an entirely new branch of the written description requirement, referred to in this chapter as the “Lilly written description” requirement (or LWD) so as to distinguish it from the “traditional written description requirement.” LWD is an odd doctrinal hybrid, purporting to apply the standard for compliance with the traditional written description requirement, but functioning in a manner more analogous to the enablement requirement. Many would argue that the Federal Circuit has yet to articulate a principled distinction between LWD and enablement: former Chief Judge Randall Rader of the Federal Circuit described LWD as nothing more than a subjective doctrinal “wildcard on which the court may rely when it faces a patent that it feels is unworthy of protection.” Empirical studies by this author and others concluded that LWD rarely if ever served as the basis for invalidating claims that could not have been reasonably, and more convincingly, invalidated for lack of enablement. This chapter provides a brief history of LWD, beginning with some background on pre-Lilly enablement and traditional written description doctrine, then describing the development of LWD, focusing on what this author believes to be the three most pertinent Federal Circuit decisions: Lilly, Enzo, and Ariad. The chapter concludes with a brief assessment of the state of LWD as of the time this article was written in 2016.

Keywords: patent, biotechnology, written description requirement, Eli Lilly, Ariad, LWD

Suggested Citation

Holman, Christopher M., The Lilly Written Description Requirement: A Doctrinal Wildcard of Uncertain Effect (2016). Research Handbook on Patent Law & Theory (2nd Edition), ISBN: 978-1-78536-411-2, Edward Elgar, 2019, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3592679

Christopher M. Holman (Contact Author)

University of Missouri - Kansas City School of Law ( email )

5100 Rockhill Road
Kansas City, MO 64110-2499
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
15
Abstract Views
72
PlumX Metrics