What is the enablement standard for compound or composition claims not limited by a recited use?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-29 10 Rules 5 Related FAQs This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice. For compound or composition claims not limited by a recited use, the enablement standard is more flexible. The MPEP states: When a compound or composition claim is not limited by a recited use, any enabled use that would reasonably correlate with the entire scope of that claim is sufficient to preclude a rejection for nonenablement based on how to use. ( MPEP 2164.01(c) ) This means that if the application discloses multiple uses for the claimed compounds or compositions, enabling any one of those uses is sufficient to satisfy the enablement requirement. However, if an examiner issues an enablement rejection, they must explain why the specification fails to enable each disclosed use. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 10 rules Collapse Enablement Requirement for Each Disclosed Use MPEP 2164.01(c) Required Use Limitation for Compound Claims MPEP 2164.01(c) Enabled Uses Must Correlate With Claim Scope MPEP 2164.01(c) Enablement Based on Claimed Use MPEP 2164.01(c) Recommended Enablement for Disclosed Uses Required MPEP 2164.01(c) Examiner Must Explain Doubts on Enablement MPEP 2164.04 Claims Must Be Supported by Description MPEP 2164 Permitted Enablement Must Be Demonstrated for Useful Invention MPEP 2164.07 Examiner Must Establish Reasonable Basis for Questioning Enablement MPEP 2164.04 Required Specification Must Describe How to Make and Use Invention MPEP 2164 Required Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse How is enablement evaluated for compound or composition claims limited by a particular use? How does the disclosure of multiple uses affect enablement in patent applications? What is required to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112 regarding how to use a claimed invention? Is it ne...