Supreme Court Brief: Fact-Dependent IP Hearing | ADA ‘Tester’ Case

Director William H. Milliken was quoted in the article “Supreme Court Brief: Fact-Dependent IP Hearing | ADA ‘Tester’ Case,” published by Law.com’s Supreme Court Brief, regarding oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi. From the article:

“‘How does the science work? How do the antibodies get generated? That’s not typical of a Supreme Court hearing,’ said Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox director William H. Milliken, who pointed in an interview after Monday’s oral argument to some of the justices’ questions.

The issue of enablement, ‘whether one reasonably skilled in the art could make or use the invention from the disclosures in the patent coupled with information known in the art without undue experimentation,’ in the life science space has been a hot topic for more than a decade, Milliken said. And the high court has only taken up one IP Act Section 112 issue once since its passage more than 70 years ago.

‘Whatever the Supreme Court says here is going to be important because it’s going to be the only recent high court pronouncement on what the standard for enablement means,’ Milliken said.”