Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part IV: The Usefulness Paradox
- Teva Capitulates to Federal Trade Commission Coercion
- USPTO Issues Memoranda on Subject Matter Eligibility
- USPTO Revokes Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventorship, But Rules Remain Basically the Same
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part III: Eligible Independent Claims Can Have Ineligible Dependent Claims
about
Category: Inequitable Conduct
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Imposition of liability under the equitable doctrine of inequitable conduct (as it has been variously defined) can result in a patent being held unenforceable; for this reason, former Chief Judge Rader called it the "atomic bomb of patent law" (see Aventis Pharma S.A. v. Amphastar Pharms., Inc., 525 F.3d 1334,…
-
By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 12th annual list of top patent stories. For 2018, we identified fifteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, the Supreme Court denied certiorari to Regeneron Pharmaceuticals in its appeal of the Federal Circuit's decision in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals v. Merus that affirmed the District Court's decision that the claims of Regeneron's patent-in-suit were unenforceable due to inequitable conduct in the patent's procurement. In so doing the Court…
-
By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 11th annual list of top patent stories. For 2017, we identified nineteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and…
-
Duty to Disclose Does Not Include Duty to Respond to Examiner Confusion By Donald Zuhn — Earlier this month, in Nevro Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp., District Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted a motion to strike filed by Plaintiff Nevro Corp., determining that the specific…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, in Tinnus Enterprises, LLC v. Telebrands Corp., U.S. Magistrate Judge John D. Love of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a report and recommendation ("Recommendation") on a Motion For Summary Judgment of No Inequitable Conduct and No Unclean Hands filed by Plaintiffs Tinnus Enterprises,…
-
[The author of this article, along with Patent Docs authors Andrew Williams and Donald Zuhn, and MBHB attorneys Jeff Armstrong, Aaron Gin, Jim Lovsin, and Jeremy Noe, filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Appellant Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and vacatur. Ed.] By Kevin E. Noonan – In a decision that took an inordinately long time to…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct in Apotex v. USB, a relatively rare occurrence in the years after the Federal Circuit's decision in Therasense v. Becton, Dickenson. In the Therasense case, the Federal Circuit sitting en banc clarified the standards for finding inequitable conduct, in…
-
By Andrew Williams — When is a combination of two separate treatments for a particular disease obvious-to-try, such that it is rendered obvious for the purposes of patentability? The Supreme Court answered this question in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), when it said that "obvious to try might show that…
-
By Andrew Williams — Last week, the Federal Circuit partially overturned the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware's decision in Santarus, Inc. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., thereby allowing Santarus to keep Par's generic version of Zegerid® off the market until the expiration of the Orange Book-listed patents. Judge Newman provided a separate opinion,…
Patent Docs 