<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
			
			<rss version="2.0">
			<channel>
			<title>Filewrapper&#xae; |  A patent, trademark, and copyright law blog by MVS - Abandonment, suppression, and concealment</title>
			<link>http://www.Filewrapper.com/index.cfm</link>
			<description>News and Commentary from the world of Intellectual Property Law - The blawg of McKee, Voorhees &amp;amp Sease, P.L.C.</description>
			<language>en-us</language>
			<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 17:36:08-0500</pubDate>
			<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:59:00-0500</lastBuildDate>
			<generator>BlogCFC</generator>
			<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
			<managingEditor>Filewrapper@ipmvs.com</managingEditor>
			<webMaster>Filewrapper@ipmvs.com</webMaster>
			
			
			
			
			
			<item>
				<title>Denial of injunction against sending letters asserting infringement affirmed</title>
				<link>http://www.Filewrapper.com/index.cfm/2008/4/10/Denial-of-injunction-against-sending-letters-asserting-infringement-affirmed</link>
				<description>
				
				&lt;p&gt;In a decision Tuesday, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/&quot; title=&quot;United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit&quot;&gt;Federal Circuit&lt;/a&gt;  affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent a patentee from representing to the defendant&amp;#39;s customers that the defendant&amp;#39;s product potentially infringed the plaintiff&amp;#39;s patent.&amp;nbsp; The patent at issue had a lengthy and complicated prosecution history that included an interference proceeding.&amp;nbsp; In that proceeding, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/bpai/index.html&quot; title=&quot;Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences&quot;&gt;BPAI&lt;/a&gt;  ruled another party properly had priority in the invention.&amp;nbsp; The patentee filed an action pursuant to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode35/usc_sec_35_00000146----000-.html&quot; title=&quot;35 U.S.C. 146&quot;&gt;&amp;sect; 146&lt;/a&gt;, and the parties eventually settled, with the party that prevailed at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/bpai/index.html&quot; title=&quot;Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences&quot;&gt;BPAI&lt;/a&gt; conceding priority and receiving a license under the patent.&amp;nbsp; In another proceeding in which the patentee was not a party, a district court held that the patentee had abandoned, suppressed, or concealed his invention.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The defendant argued that because of the issues relating to priority and abandonment, suppression, and concealment (as well as inequitable conduct issues), the plaintiff&amp;#39;s assertions of infringement were in bad faith, and sought an injunction to prevent the plaintiff from representing to the defendant&amp;#39;s customers that its products potentially infringed.&amp;nbsp; The district court rejected this, finding the four-factor test did not warrant an injunction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Federal Circuit affirmed, finding the action not objectively unreasonable, as the case was not so clear-cut to make the district court&amp;#39;s decision an abuse of discretion.&amp;nbsp; However, while the court noted the defendant&amp;#39;s chances on appeal were &amp;quot;slim,&amp;quot; the appeal was not &amp;quot;clearly hopeless,&amp;quot; and declined to award the plaintiff its fees for the appeal.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;More detail of &lt;em&gt;Judkins v. HT Window Fashion Corp.&lt;/em&gt; after the jump.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
				 [More]
				</description>
						
				
				<category>Attorney fees/exceptional cases</category>				
				
				<category>Federal Circuit cases</category>				
				
				<category>Inequitable conduct</category>				
				
				<category>Injunctions</category>				
				
				<category>Abandonment, suppression, and concealment</category>				
				
				<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:59:00-0500</pubDate>
				<guid>http://www.Filewrapper.com/index.cfm/2008/4/10/Denial-of-injunction-against-sending-letters-asserting-infringement-affirmed</guid>
				
			</item>
			
		 	
			</channel></rss>