Ninth Circuit: Patent law terms in employment agreement should be given patent law definitions In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit held a district court's jury instructions regarding construction of the patent ownership provisions of an employment agreement erred in applying contract law rather than patent law. The court determined that jury instructions defining the terms "conceive," "reduce to practice," and "Work of Dr. Yu" (a possible coinventor) required […] Continue Reading →
Equitable inventorship correction claim must be resolved after factually-overlapping fraud claim The Federal Circuit issued a ruling Friday addressing the right to a jury trial in a case involving combined equitable (in the form of a correction of inventorship claim under 35 U.S.C. § 256 ) and legal (in the form of various tort claims) issues. The court held that the jury trial on the legal […] Continue Reading →