Improper Claim Structure Under Sec. 112(4/d)

  • 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). Compare Monsanto (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) with Pfizer (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 to learn more about us.

©2024 Klarquist Sparkman, LLP. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Notice | Privacy Policy | Site Map