Panel Conflict: Is Claim In Form Of Dependent Claim But Violating Sec. 112(4/d) Invalid?: “A dependent claim that contradicts, rather than narrows, the claim from which it depends is invalid.” MultiLayer Stretch (Fed. Cir. 08/04/16) (2-1) (aff’g invalidity under Sec. 112(4/d) of dependent claim that specified a resin not contained in closed Markush group of independent claim). CompareMonsanto (Fed. Cir. 10/04/07) (a claim referring to another claim is in dependent form and subject to Sec. 112(4/d) only if it incorporates the limitations (e.g., steps) of that referenced claim and further limits that claim, such that it can be infringed only by infringing the referenced claim) withPfizer (Fed. Cir. 08/02/06) (a claim purporting to be dependent form but not complying with Sec. 112(4/d) is invalid).
Patent Defenses is a research tool maintained by Klarquist since 2004. Visit klarquist.com to learn more about us.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.