[U.S.] June 2022 <CAFC> F.4th 1362, Novartis v. Accord
更新日：3 日前
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: 2024-09-18 (Japan time). Full English translation.
[U.S.] June 2022 <CAFC> F.4th 1362, Novartis v. Accord
The negative expression requiring administration “at a dosage of 0.5 mg/day without an immediately preceding loading dose” failed the written-description requirement.
The basis for exclusion is stated in the specification.
or
Even without an express statement, the written-description requirement is satisfied if a person skilled in the art invariably understands that the matter is necessarily excluded.
Translator’s notes (editorial)
The source’s standalone sentence says the basis for exclusion “is stated” in the specification. Its tension with the preceding negative outcome is preserved, not resolved by adding unstated wording. The incomplete reporter citation is retained.
Related articles
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.
