Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Past versus present: the importance of tense in patent application examples

  • Patents
  • Published:

From Nature Biotechnology

View current issue Submit your manuscript

The Federal Circuit questions an example's validity in Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Promega.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Promega, 323 F.3d 1354 (CAFC, 2003).

  2. Described in 37 CFR § 1.71.

  3. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §; 608.01(p)(II), August 2001.

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jane E.R. Potter and Gargi Talukder (summer 2003)

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, 2600 Century Square, 1501 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, 98101-1688, Washington, USA

    Jane E R Potter & Gargi Talukder

Authors
  1. Jane E R Potter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gargi Talukder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Potter, J., Talukder, G. Past versus present: the importance of tense in patent application examples. Nat Biotechnol 21, 1397–1398 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1103-1397

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1103-1397

  • Springer Nature America, Inc.

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation