In re Xencor, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · March 13, 2025 · No. 24-1870

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's rejection of Xencor's patent application claims for lacking sufficient written description. The court held that the limiting preamble of a Jepson claim requires written description support, and that the phrase "treating a patient" in the method claim's preamble is a limiting limitation. Substantial evidence supported the finding that the specification failed to demonstrate possession of treating patients with the claimed anti-C5 antibodies.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Writing for the Court
Hughes; Stark; Schroeder
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decision date
March 13, 2025
Docket number
24-1870
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Standard of review
Legal determinations reviewed de novo; factual findings reviewed for substantial evidence
Precedential value
published
Parties
Xencor, Inc. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

patent lawappellate procedurestandard of reviewintellectual property

Practice areas

intellectual property

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the limiting preamble of a Jepson claim requires a written description under 35 U.S.C. §112.
  2. Whether the phrase “treating a patient” in the preamble of claim 9 is a limiting limitation that requires written description.
  3. Whether the Board’s factual findings that Xencor lacked adequate written description are supported by substantial evidence.

Holdings

  1. The limiting preamble of a Jepson claim must be supported with sufficient written description, and the patentee’s burden of written description extends to the limiting preamble.
  2. The phrase “treating a patient” in the preamble of claim 9 is a limiting limitation that must be supported by written description.
  3. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that Xencor failed to provide adequate written description for both the Jepson claim preamble and the claim‑9 preamble.

Factual background

Xencor’s patent application claimed anti‑C5 antibodies, including the monoclonal antibody 5G1.1, modified to have longer serum half‑life. The application disclosed limited data and did not describe specific diseases or conditions for treating patients with the claimed antibodies.

Procedural history

The Board issued an initial decision on Jan. 10, 2023 rejecting the claims for lack of written description. After rehearing, the Board again rejected the claims. The ARP issued its decision on May 21, 2024 affirming the Board’s findings. Xencor appealed the ARP decision to the Federal Circuit.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…