What Happened
In May 2023, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the Federal Circuit: Amgen's antibody patents were invalid. The Court said you can't claim all antibodies that perform a function when you've only disclosed 26 specific ones. Finding the rest would require too much trial and error. The patent bargain requires you to enable the full scope of what you claim.
Why It Matters
This is a significant win for the principle that patents should disclose, not just claim. The Court endorsed the "Wands factors"—a framework for determining whether undue experimentation is required to practice the full scope of a claim.
For biotechnology, the impact is immediate. Broad genus claims to antibodies, genetic sequences, and other biological materials will face heightened scrutiny. Patent applicants will need to disclose more species, provide more detail, and claim more narrowly.
But the effect extends beyond biotech. Any technology area where patents claim broad functions rather than specific implementations—software, chemicals, materials—needs to pay attention. The principle is general: you get what you teach, not what you wish you had invented.
What You Should Know
If you're filing patents, disclose extensively. Don't hold back embodiments "for later." Claim what you've actually invented, not everything you hope to cover. Use continuation applications to expand coverage as you develop more examples.
If you're challenging patents, enablement is now a stronger tool. Look for gaps between what's claimed and what's disclosed. In unpredictable arts especially, broad claims are vulnerable.
The Amgen decision reinforces a basic truth: patents are about disclosure, not just exclusion.