holding that firefighters’ claims for retaliatory transfers were time-barred, and continuing violation principle did not save claims because the plaintiffs had been alerted to the need to protect their rights at the time the transfers were effected; the plaintiffs had filed grievances alleging that the transfers were retaliatory
How later courts described this case
- holding that firefighters’ claims for retaliatory transfers were time-barred, and continuing violation principle did not save claims because the plaintiffs had been alerted to the need to protect their rights at the time the transfers were effected; the plaintiffs had filed grievances alleging that the transfers were retaliatory
- noting that it was Congress’s intent to restore the law regarding broad functional language in combination claims to its state prior to Halliburton
- disclosure of four species was sufficient even for huge genus that was not fully known at the time of the invention
- “all the elements of a combination now will be able to be claimed in terms of what they do as well as in terms of what they are”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Pernix Ir. Pain Dac v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd., 323 F. Supp. 3d 566 (2018)
Fuetterer , however, is distinguishable on an important ground, which is a theme that runs through a number of decisions of the Federal Circuit and its predecessor.
The opinion
WOE/LÉY*,
ALMOND, J., joins (disséirtíWg')'.1,1^
iJ"Ti dm ‘uhable‘-tq ágféé:tíiát thé* board erfed;''in! 'i'fejectihg'u'the' ;dl'afms'‘ on* file* ground’s*; of1 :fuhctidriáliíy''' atíd’1 undue’ bfeadth'.”*'’ *> -'.r.'í.i...
'‘'Áppellañ'lí'^fines’'one of1me' nfáteriáís .i-U .¡i íi-hh'.Wíü ¡: .if '..-JJo.A in his composition as cm mor game’ salt suspeHsion^iÉ 'wúef^’ ’(•italics1 ‘Míipiiíje’aí) ‘ Th'e'examiner beld'thá't* language!'fkile'¿’ i’ne} examiner fi^ld to properly ^definérthe' invéá'tíbn. u,,iJ * ^ 1
affirming, the hoard s.tated: ’ ■ ’ ‘
ovo wri f f .;j fy^gtioy.ftyssgrfiedj f orspits,^¡, ,i.s. jfcnoma in, art .mMAtÁjm ,,$pl$í}ja,¡p .fippty p:qCi g$pÁffy' tfyertf ufajhñ #s,$q^¿r¡<59ttyyWfyiofií it\ fairly,, r^gdily^detgrpninod^ 'rfplfsMV' %ug,ttyb\e ?í$\s ■ Miñítáv, avá »fmfcn ^¿Th^wpw* tmwiMy^hei »Mm> ;fWF#í?fl(sAWÍ(?'vf not be required of the public or even by those skilled in the art.,]cordinglyv'weswilbsustaj-nsthis réjecw tiorí.f '.‘(Italics;-supplied.-)'!
I’fifad‘no-'évidéhbe dri-tMW record before us ‘Which -WdaldYfi ’'a'nyWiSé'-'fefUfe' that reasoning and conclusion. -
.¡■ffilie. basis ‘for-¡rejection here-ismleatly 35» UíS.C.¡i§ ..>l-12»-.Which¡rrfiquires ;án, ap‘plicant'-to .particulaylycpoihtíoutvand' disr» tintítly >claim, ,Ms< ‘alleged- invention. <»The issue; of failure to comply^with-that‘-section- becauseiof idunotionality. ..-introduces.an-elenafent of ¡degree;iwh'ichf ,much‘,'Tiké: the; question .¡of; obvibusniessj > is» dependent» onlthe particular facts in» each case." ■>.
!I't'see'nT.S’!tO,'me that‘óh'e‘ skilldd'in this-' aft Would betunadle to- déterihiné, with1out* í elaboratei ¡experimentation',-' which salts,- -other.tháníithe.»four disclosed,1 are capable -,of¡ ¡performing,jthe /desired func-tion*»»That is iso¡¡because appellant ¡'has to disglpse,any,factual criteria'orsc.ieptific,, pyinpipl.es; (upqrt r w,hich. ¡equiva-, lence can be based.
Only four examples are given in the specification;‘and They'iibelong) to a narrow .group, viz?3,alkaline earth .or alkali salts’of garbonicpiyphosphon the. disclosure'' does"’not^.teacb, whether‘ any inorganic salts,' other ‘tban tjie'four'. disclosed, woutó perform fíie same function. The..common properties of the sans re*»«ir *U5*; vt\ * i "tf'. l » ■ *kf T»r“iwv; j lied on to perform said! function arp not disclosed, nor' are '.the 'examples sufM >iL Ml ! "}l >,'» i íj ; I (■' ficiently numerous to make clear what" those pfopertiés'mígKt bel" ,gincé ébüivalent saltas cannot be determined from tfia ' ' »■ »i 11 j * ’ ,‘j, 3 5J ft * ; •, HA"’1 v 1' t«'1 1 ! ' teaching.,of’ the.disclosure or the skill of the arf,, sorely appellant.,is (npt entitled to clájm them." Discovery of suitable protein and carbohydrate m colloidal, sus-, pension in a laboratory test tube, but whether 'fiíe^’ woülÜ ’'actaafty' maintain ■,1.0.:"; :■> -í> í «tü i-,ir,ri -stf" 'y,.J> the suspension, under conditions of use, s;. T»,'.; . e., m icy-water, under the pressure JlllaI. j- : ..’i'/A'/f;--. 21 a _:v «•'if T; i'
>&5.. WteiiW^?fe;,fil^F1y«Fe¡?.Ví1^'t.W »Wfjf ing vague, indefinite and toó broad*,.. such their allowance is precluded by 35 „U.S*C..;§ 112. I would affirm.