June 10, 2026
Authored and Edited by Christine M. Akagi; Ryan V. McDonnell; Sonja W. Sahlsten
In Enviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc., v. Safe Foods Corp., No. 2024-2160 (Fed. Cir. May 4, 2026), the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s determination that all asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,912,321 were invalid as indefinite.
Enviro Tech sued Safe Foods for infringement of the ’321 patent, which relates to methods of treating poultry during processing to increase weight. The asserted claims recite “a pH of about 7.6 to 10,” and Safe Foods argued that the term “about” is indefinite. The district court agreed, determining that the intrinsic evidence failed to inform a skilled artisan as to the scope of “about” with reasonable certainty.
The Federal Circuit affirmed. First, the Court determined that the claims themselves provided no guidance as to the degree of deviation encompassed by “about.” Second, the Court found that the specification provided conflicting guidance on acceptable pH variance that “about” could encompass because it applied differing deviations in pH ranges across experiments. Third, the Court concluded that statements made during prosecution did not clarify the scope of “about” because Enviro Tech neither defined the term nor applied it consistently, at times arguing it was material to some claims and immaterial to others. The Court also noted that amendments narrowing the claimed pH range to overcome prior art heightened the need for clarity in defining the scope of “about,” reinforcing its conclusion that the claim term is indefinite.
Copyright © 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Federal Circuit Reinforces Injury-in-Fact Requirement in Appeals from Post-Grant Proceedings
June 10, 2026
European IP Blog
UPC Central Division Revokes Patent Covering Covid-19 Treatment Remdesivir
8 June 2026
Articles
California Reaches Record $12.75 Million CCPA Settlement with General Motors Over Driver Data
June 4, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.