Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Gen-Probe Inc.

296 F.3d 1316 (2002)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
E
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Gen-Probe Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
296 F.3d 1316 (2002)

Facts

Enzo (plaintiff) sued Gen-Probe (defendant) for infringement of a patent claiming nucleic acid probes of a species of bacteria that would assist in its detection.. Gen-Probe moved for summary judgment on the ground that the claims were invalid for failing to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶ 1, which the district court granted. 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶ 1 states that an inventor must set forth a written description of his invention, enabling one of skill in the art to make and use it, and put forth the best mode known the inventor at the time of filing. The Federal Circuit initially affirmed the district court ruling, but, after granting a petition for rehearing, reversed and remanded. A Federal Circuit judge not on the panel that heard the appeal polled the circuit judges to determine if the case should be re-heard en banc. This poll failed, and Judge Rader dissented from the decision not to re-hear the case en banc, believing that the law needed to be revisited. Judge Lourie, on the other hand, filed a concurrence with the order on the en banc rehearing, believing that the state of the law did not require the full Court to review it.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning ()

Concurrence (Lourie, C.J.)

Dissent (Rader, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 804,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Patent

Key Terms