Is a working example required to satisfy enablement?

The assertion that a working example is not required to satisfy enablement is accurate because enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112 does not mandate the inclusion of a working example in every patent application. The law requires that the application provides enough detail for a person skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention without undue experimentation. Therefore, prophetic examples—those that describe what the inventors predict will work, rather than what has been tested—can be used to satisfy this requirement.

This approach acknowledges that different inventions may require varying levels of detail based on their complexity. In many cases, a description of the invention, along with sufficient information and guidance, may be sufficient for a person of ordinary skill to reproduce the invention.

The alternatives imply requirements that do not align with the enablement standard, as there are instances where enablement can be achieved without a working example, whether through a clear description or through prophetic examples. The flexibility in the presentation of examples allows inventors to approach the enablement requirement creatively while still aligning with the statutory requirements.