Johns Hopkins University v. 454 Life Sciences CorporationC.A. No. 13-1853-LPS, August 24, 2015.

Stark, J.  The court considers 4 terms from pending patent applications following final judgment of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

The court first determines that when a party is challenging a claim’s compliance with the written description requirement during an interference, the originating disclosure provides the meaning of the pertinent claim language.  The following terms are construed:

  1. generating a plurality of molecules of a fragment of deoxyribonucleic acid
  2. delivering the plurality of molecules of the fragment of deoxyribonucleic acid into aqueous microreactors in a water-in-oil emulsion such that a plurality of aqueous microreactors comprise a single molecule of the fragment of deoxyribonucleic acid, a single bead capable of hybridizing to the fragment of deoxyribonucleic acid, and regents necessary to perform deoxyribonucleic acid amplification
  3. deoxyribonucleic acid DNA
  4. a single bead capable of hybridizing to the fragment