A product-by-process claim is a mechanism for claiming a product that cannot be adequately described by its structure. A literal reading of a product-by-process claim suggests that an accused product can literally infringe on a product-by-process claim only if the accused product is made by the process of the product-by-process claim. But, prior to the recent decision in Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc., Appeal No. 2007-1400, decided May 18, 2009, product-by-process claims were not read literally when it came to infringement – infringement of a product-by-process claim was based on the product itself rather than on the process used in making the product. The en banc court in Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc. moved towards the literal reading of product-by-process claims, which provoked a long dissent by a number of the Circuit judges – something along the lines of the en banc court being rash in making a decision to overturn a longstanding precedent, failing to consider the effect of the decision on, for example, “today’s complex and biological products whose structure may be difficult to analyze with precision” and those who may be relying on the old way of determining infringement of product-by-process claims.