Enzo Biochem Inc v Calgene Inc, 52 USPQ2d 1129 (Fed Cir September 24 1999), is a case which illustrates that the patent practitioner´ s well-nigh intuitive impetus to obtain the broadest possible patent claims should at times be checked. The Court found invalid for non-compliance of the accompanying disclosure with 35 USC §112, ¶1 broad claims covering the application of so-called antisense process technology to both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells and the resulting modified cells. (Eukaryotic cells are those from complex life forms, including plants, animals and fungi; prokaryotic cells are from simple, including unicellular, life forms, eg the common bacterium, E.coli, is a prokaryotic.)
