How does the predictability of a technology affect enablement requirements?

The predictability of a technology significantly affects enablement requirements in patent law. Generally, less predictable technologies require more detailed disclosure to satisfy the enablement requirement. The MPEP Section 2164.06(b) provides examples illustrating this principle:

In the Enzo Biochem v. Calgene case, the court noted that “antisense gene technology was highly unpredictable.” This unpredictability contributed to the finding that the patents were invalid due to lack of enablement.

Similarly, in In re Wright, the court considered the unpredictability of developing vaccines for RNA viruses in determining that the invention was not enabled for all retroviruses or even all avian retroviruses.

For more predictable technologies, less detailed disclosure may be sufficient. Inventors working in unpredictable fields should provide more comprehensive disclosures, including detailed working examples and guidance, to satisfy the enablement requirement.

To learn more:

Topics: MPEP 2100 - Patentability, MPEP 2164.06(B) - Examples Of Enablement Issues — Biological And Chemical Cases, Patent Law, Patent Procedure
Tags: Biotechnology, disclosure requirements, Enablement, Predictability