Scripps Clinic & Research Foundation v. Genentech, Inc.
666 F. Supp. 1379·3 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1481·1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7189
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 20, 1987C-83-5423-WWSCalifornia10,567 words
Opinion
Opinion
Schwarzer, J.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction 1382
II. Factual Background 1383
III. The Claims at Issue 1385
IV. Infringement 1380
A. General Principles 1386
B. The Product-by-Process Claims 1386
1. Claim Interpretation 1386
2. Infringement 1387
a. Tuddenham Human Factor VIII:C 1388
b. Plasma-derived Factor VIII:C 1388
Produced by Genentech
c. Recombinant Factor VIII:C
Produced by Genentech 1388
d. Doctrine of Equivalents 1388
e. Summary 1389
C. The Product Claims 1389
1. Claim Interpretation 1389
2. Infringement 1390
a. Plasma-derived Factor VIII:C
Produced by Genentech 1390
b. Recombinant Factor VIII:C
Produced by Genentech 1391
i. The Scope of the Product Claims 1391
(1) The Structure and Function of Recombinant Factor VIII:C 1391
(2) Genentech’s Statements 1392
(3) Genentech’s Response 1393
ii. Claims Limitations 1394
iii. Summary 1395
V. Inducement to Infringe 1395
VI. Non-Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. § 271 (e)(1) 1395
VII. Inequitable Conduct ^39^
A. Background 1397
B. Materiality 1397
1. Insufficient Disclosure in the Abstract 1399
2. Cumulative Information 1399