Results for written description
Preambles can be limiting when they state an intended purpose for methods of using a compound.
Claims that lack support from the written description are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶6 is not invoked, in the absence of reciting the term “means”, if those skilled in the art understand the structural significance of the claim language. Also, in means-plus-function claims, even if a disputed term is not limited to a single structure, the disputed term is not disqualified as a corresponding structure as long as a class of structures is identifiable by a skilled artisan.
A specification can communicate to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a patentee invented not just the combination of all identified features but also sub-combinations of the features – which may achieve the purposes of an invention even without the omitted features.
There must be adequate support within the description of a patent to claim a genus when a species is described.
Best mode requirement does not actually require a disclosure of the best mode, but rather requires sufficient disclosure to enable one of skill in the art to practice the best mode without undue experimentation.