[U.S.] November 2015 <CAFC> 850 F.3d 1350, Inphi v. Netlist
Updated: 6 hours ago
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: United States
Topics: Support requirement
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2024-09-16 (Japan time). Full English translation.
[U.S.] November 2015 <CAFC> 850 F.3d 1350, Inphi v. Netlist
The negative expression “excluding ‘CAS, RAS, or bank address signals’” satisfied the written-description requirement.
An industry association's standards publication concerning the technology of the invention was incorporated into the specification, enabling a person skilled in the art reasonably to infer that particular signals were excluded.
(The court cited Santarus.)
Translator’s notes (editorial)
The reporter citation 850 F.3d 1350 is reproduced as given in the source; not independently corrected.
Update history
The first-published date remains unchanged. Display maintenance, classification changes, related-article updates, and text corrections are recorded separately.
November 1, 2026: First published on this website.
November 2, 2026: Added article information, classification, topics, language navigation, related articles where the same case was confirmed, consultation guidance, and SEO. The original text and first-published date were preserved.
Comments