Abstract
Biotechnology Law ReportVol. 41, No. 2 The Holman ReportIs the Chemical Genus Claim Really “Dead” at the Federal Circuit?: Part IIBy Christopher M. HolmanBy Christopher M. HolmanChristopher M. Holman is a Professor of Law at the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law; a Senior Scholar at the Center for Intellectual Property x Innovation Policy (CIP-2) at the Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University; and the Executive Editor of Biotechnology Law Report.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:12 Apr 2022https://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2022.29264.cmhAboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail View articleFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byThe Enablement and Written Description Requirements Through the Lens of the Federal Circuit's Actions (As Opposed to Its Words) CHRISTOPHER M. HOLMAN11 October 2022 | Biotechnology Law Report, Vol. 41, No. 5 Volume 41Issue 2Apr 2022 InformationCopyright 2022, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:By Christopher M. Holman.Is the Chemical Genus Claim Really “Dead” at the Federal Circuit?: Part II.Biotechnology Law Report.Apr 2022.58-77.http://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2022.29264.cmhPublished in Volume: 41 Issue 2: April 12, 2022Online Ahead of Print:April 4, 2022PDF download
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
