Filewrapper®

Category: Inequitable conduct


Supreme Court Issues Decision on Treble Damages
June 13, 2016
Post by Blog Staff
On the subject of willful infringement, 35 U.S.C. § 284 provides that, "[T]he court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.‚¬ On its face, the statute allows for broad discretion by the district courts, but the Federal Circuit set out a stricter standard for awarding of enhanced damages, as In re Seagate Technology LLC. This test required clear and c.......
Read More


"Unavailable" Joint Inventor after the America Invents Act
March 23, 2016
Post by Blog Staff
Paul S. Mazzola All applications for United States patent must include an oath or declaration signed by each inventor. The oath or declaration must be furnished to the United States Patent and Trademark Office no later than the date on which the issue fee is paid, but preferably on the same day as the non-provisional application is filed to avoid payment of a surcharge. Provisional appli.......
Read More


Supreme Court to Review Willful Infringement Standard in Light of Octane Fitness
October 21, 2015
Post by Blog Staff
Paul S. Mazzola In the 2014 case of Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness, the Supreme Court overruled Federal Circuit jurisprudence and provided a flexible framework for district courts to grant attorney's fees in "exceptional cases"under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The Court reasoned that requiring a prevailing party to show "material inappropriate conduct"or that a case was both "object.......
Read More


Legitimate Advocacy and Genuine Misrepresentation of Material Facts
August 25, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit has issued a decision inApotex Inc. v. UCB, Inc., upholding a district court's finding that Apotex's U.S. Patent No. 6,767,556 ("the '556 patent") is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. Dr. Sherman, founder and chairman of Apotex, wrote the '556 patent application and is its sole inventor. The '556 is based on Canadian application filed on April 5, 2000........
Read More


New and Useful - January 23, 2013
January 23, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
· In Wax v. Amazon Techs., the Federal Circuit upheld the TTAB’s denial of registration of the mark AMAZON VENTURES. Applicant filed and intent-to-use application to register the mark for “investment management, raising venture capital for others, . . . and capital investment consultation.” Amazon Technologies, Inc.—online retailer and owner of several AMAZON.COM marks&mdas.......
Read More


Federal Circuit Establishes New Standard for Inequitable Conduct
June 15, 2011
Post by Blog Staff
On May 25, 2011 the Federal Circuit released its en banc decision in Theresense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. , in which the Court articulated the appropriate standard for inequitable conduct before the PTO. The majority wrote, “[t]his court now tightens the standards for finding both intent and materiality in order to redirect a doctrine that has been overused to the detriment of the public.” .......
Read More


Federal Circuit to consider overhaul of inequitable conduct standards en banc
April 26, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
In an order today, the Federal Circuit granted rehearing en banc in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. The order indicates the court will be reconsidering its precedent on virtually the entire gamut of issues relating to inequitable conduct. Specifically, the questions presented are:Should the materiality-intent-balancing framework for inequitable conduct be modified or replaced?If so, how? In parti.......
Read More


Disclosure of compounds without link to claimed method fails to meet written description requirement
April 14, 2009
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's denial of judgment as a matter of law after a jury determined the asserted claims of an invention were not invalid under the written description requirement. The court, however, affirmed the district court's determination of no inequitable conduct.The Federal Circuit held the jury lacked substantial evidence for its verdict. Specifica.......
Read More


Failure to raise KSR post-trial but pre-judgment results in waiver
March 05, 2009
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury's verdict of infringement, no obviousness, and no inequitable conduct. On appeal, the defendant for the first time argued the jury's verdict should be reversed in light of KSR. The Federal Circuit held the argument had been waived. The jury reached its verdict on December 8, 2006. Post-trial motions were fully briefed on February 20, 2007, and .......
Read More


High materiality without explanation for nondisclosure leads to inference of intent to deceive
October 17, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of inequitable conduct for one patent but reversed on a second, affirmed a finding of no invalidity of the second patent, but vacated the finding of infringement after modifying the district court's claim construction of a claim term. The court also reversed the finding of indefiniteness of a third patent.The court continued it.......
Read More


No evidence of intent to deceive, no inequitable conduct
September 10, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's grant of summary judgment of inequitable conduct against the patentee. At issue was whether the patentee's failure to disclose a letter describing an aspect of the prior art constituted inequitable conduct. The court reversed finding that the alleged infringer had failed to provide sufficient facts to support an inference of intent to.......
Read More


Finding of inequitable conduct without considering materiality vacated
August 06, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision on Friday, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's summary judgment of invalidity and noninfringement and subsequent finding of inequitable conduct. The court also vacated the district court's exceptional case finding and the associated award of attorney's fees.The plaintiff was initially awarded partial summary judgment of infringement of six patents. The district judge then a.......
Read More


Federal Circuit provides more post-KSR guidance for obviousness for chemical compounds
July 24, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision Monday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's decision finding asserted claims of a patent valid and enforceable. Specifically, the court affirmed a finding that the asserted claims were nonobvious as a matter of law, and that the evidence did not support a finding of inequitable conduct. The Federal Circuit, applying KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. in the context of similarly-st.......
Read More


Failure to consider evidence of good faith leads to reversal of inequitable conduct finding
June 25, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of no infringement and invalidity for obviousness, and reversed the district court's finding of unenforceability due to inequitable conduct.The Federal Circuit, citing KSR, noted that an obviousness analysis can take account the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ, and held th.......
Read More


Finding of inequitable conduct affirmed, Judge Rader expresses concern over resurgence of defense
May 14, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision today, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of inequitable conduct resulting from Rule 132 declarations that were used to overcome obviousness and anticipation rejections. The declarations used a difference in half-lives to distinguish the claimed composition over the prior art, however, it failed to indicate that the comparative half-lives were calculated using different init.......
Read More


License under method patent not limited to use with licensor's products absent express limitation
April 18, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision Wednesday, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part, and reversed-in-part a district court's decision regarding two patents. The district court held the broadest claims of both patents invalid and not infringed, and dismissed claims of inequitable conduct relating to the patents.The Federal Circuit affirmed with respect to one patent, but vacated and reversed with respect to the ot.......
Read More


Denial of injunction against sending letters asserting infringement affirmed
April 10, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision Tuesday, the Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent a patentee from representing to the defendant's customers that the defendant's product potentially infringed the plaintiff's patent. The patent at issue had a lengthy and complicated prosecution history that included an interference proceeding. In that proceeding, the BPAI ruled another par.......
Read More


Federal Circuit: And can mean or, if it makes the claim make sense
April 08, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's permanent injunction against a defendant to prevent infringement of a patent. The district court held the patent not invalid and infringed, based in part on a claim construction that construed the word "and" to mean "or." Specifically, based on the specification and other claims, the court determined such a construc.......
Read More


Section 121 safe harbor applies only to divisional, not continuation-in-part; later patent invalid
March 12, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit construed the scope of § 121's allowances for subsequent patent applications directed toward nonelected inventions in response to a restriction requirement. There were three patents at issue, one directed to pharmaceutical compounds, one to compositions containing those compounds, and a third covering methods of suing the compounds. The method of use patent .......
Read More


Disclosure of prior art abstract only when more relevant detail known results in inequitable conduct
January 28, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of inequitable conduct based on nondisclosure of details of a poster presentation presented at a scientific conference. While the patentee disclosed the abstract during prosecution of the patents-in-suit, notes taken by one of the patentee's employees with much more detail of what was actually presented at the conference were n.......
Read More


When market entry fee part of damages for patent infringement, permanent injunction inappropriate
January 21, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of infringement of a patent relating to the detection and classification of Hepatitis C Virus, but remanded the case for a determination of anticipation. In arguably the most interesting aspect of the decision, the court vacated the permanent injunction entered against the defendant. The plaintiff asked for and was awarded damages to compensate for th.......
Read More


Five things not to do when prosecuting patent applications
October 11, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's judgment of patent unenforceability as a result of inequitable conduct on behalf of the applicant. The court affirmed that five different actions on the part of the patentee constituted inequitable conduct:1. Failure to identify the association between the applicant and the individual providing a Rule 132 affidavit during prosecutio.......
Read More


Attorney cannot directly appeal finding of inequitable conduct absent formal sanctions
August 13, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit today addressed whether a prosecuting attorney who was found to have committed inequitable conduct during an infringement suit of the patent prosecuted may intervene to contest the finding. The court held that when an attorney is merely criticized by the court, not formally reprimanded, they have no standing to appeal. As a result, the court affirmed the district court's decision denying.......
Read More


Judge sanctions Qualcomm for concealing over 200,000 pages of documents, providing false testimony
August 08, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
It's been a rough week for Qualcomm. On Monday, the Bush administration let stand the ITC ruling barring import of mobile phones using certain Qualcomm chips unless a license fee is paid to Broadcom, a competing company who holds patents covering the power management technology used in the chips. Also Monday, a federal judge in California found that Qualcomm had committed serious litigation misconduct in a.......
Read More


Invalidity affirmed on double patenting grounds; inequitable conduct finding vacated
July 24, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In the second of two rulings yesterday, the Federal Circuit found the patent on Toprol-XL® (a drug used to treat hypertension, angina, and congestive heart failure) invalid based on obviousness-type double patenting, affirming summary judgment on the issue. The court vacated and remanded the grant of summary judgment of unenforceability due to inequitable conduct, as the district court improperly equated a .......
Read More


"Attorney argument" and late disclosure not enough to support inequitable conduct finding
June 28, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit issued a ruling yesterday that provides some guidance on the issues of indefiniteness and inequitable conduct. The court held that the term "near" was sufficiently definite for identifying the location of an incision in veterinary surgery, because the meaning could be adduced from the intrinsic evidence. Further, the court held that as long as the examiner has time to consider a su.......
Read More


Federal Circuit affirms inequitable conduct finding, Judge Newman not happy about it
May 18, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a second opinion today, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of inequitable conduct based on the nondisclosure of three pieces of information to the USPTO. The patentee had two similar pending applications at the USPTO, and in fact had cited the same prior art in both applications via information disclosure statements. In addition, a continuation-in-part (CIP) was filed based on the fi.......
Read More


Inequitable Conduct Found in False Statements and Deception
March 21, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a case before the Federal Circuit, the District Court's conclusion that Cantor's patent was unenforceable due to inequitable conduct was affirmed. The matter before the Court involved a patent for a method and system for trading financial instruments. Specifically, Cantor developed a system that would automate the trading process and avoid the use of "open outcry" and "trade capture processes." .......
Read More


Dippin' Dots: brought to you by inequitable conduct, but not an antitrust violation
February 09, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
What do Dippin' Dots, the little beads of ice cream sold at fairs, stadiums, and malls, have to do with patent and antitrust law? For the Federal Circuit, they presented the "close case" where a patent holder can be found to have engaged in inequitable conduct during prosecution of the patent but is not liable for a Walker Process antitrust claim by an infringement defendant. This is possib.......
Read More


Federal jury finds H.264 video compression standard does not infringe patent
January 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
A federal jury in San Diego recently found that Broadcom, a company that produces chips used in everything from mobile phones to next-generation DVD players, does not infringe two patents held by Qualcomm on video compression technology. Why is this finding important? Qualcomm asserted its patents covered the H.264 video compression standard, which is the standard used by everything from DirecTV and Dish Network.......
Read More


Working until the end of the year, Federal Circuit addresses a Law School Exam Type Case
December 26, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit affirmed a Southern District of Indiana decision that generic drug makers IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Dr. Reddy's Labratories, Ltd. (DRL) and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. infringed Eli Lilly and Company's (Lilly) U.S. Patent no. 5,229,382. The '382 Patent claims chemical compound olanzapine and the use of the compound to treat schizophrenia. The infringers attempted to show that the '382 was.......
Read More


Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace - Failure to Raise Verdict Inconsistency Defeats Appeal
December 14, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
In L&W, Inc. v. Shertech, Inc. and Steven W. Sheridan ("Shertech"), the Court affirmed in part the decision of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan holding claim 7 valid and claim 10 invalid of Shertech's '264 patent, and affirming the portion of the judgment holding that the '264 patent was not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. At issue was a patent ("the '265 paten.......
Read More


Enablement standard for prior art less stringent than enablement standard for patents
November 21, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit, in Impax Laboratories, Inc. v. Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc., discussed the requirements for a prior art reference to be enabled, and thus anticipate a patent. Aventis is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 5,527,814, covering the use of the compound riluzole to treat ALS, commonly known as Lou Gehrig's disease. Impax wanted to produce a generic version of riluzole,so it filed an abbreviated new dru.......
Read More


View all Filewrapper® Posts

Search Posts

Purpose

The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

Disclaimer

McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.