Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Delaware IP Law Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: Delaware IP Law BlogJudge Robinson: Prior decision of inequitable conduct on remand from Federal Circuit REVERSED
By Karen E. Keller, Andrew A. Lundgren et al.
In Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corporation and Scimed Life Systems, Inc., C.A. No. 98-197-SLR (D. Del. Aug. 10, 2009), Judge Robinson reversed her March 2002 decision that nondisclosure of material prior art during prosecution of the patent-at-issue was inequitable conduct which tainted the prosecution of another patent, making both unenforceable. Id. at 1. The Federal Circuit had remanded, in June 2006, for additional findings of fact regarding deceptive intent and how the later patent was tainted by the inequitable conduct related to the first patent. Id. In reversing her prior decision, Judge Robinson applied the standard reinforced by the Federal Circuit in 2008 in Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 538 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2008) related to the evidentiary burden to be met in order to prove inequitable conduct. Id. at 5-6. Although Judge Robinson determined that a material reference was not disclosed to the PTO, ?defendants must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that [the patentee] and/or [his attorney] ?made a deliberate decision to withhold a known material reference.?? Id. at 8 (citing Star Scientific, 537 F.3d at 1366) (emphasis added). Judge Robinson determined that the clear and convincing standard had not been met by defendants because ?the evidence cited in support of finding inequitable conduct is not clearly more compelling than the evidence cited in support of not finding inequitable conduct.? Id. at 8-9. In addition, nondisclosure of the material prior art could not carry over to the later patent because the prior art in question was identified in connection with this later patent and reviewed by the PTO examiner. Id. at 9-10.
Full post as published by Delaware IP Law Blog on August 17, 2009 (boomark / email).
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TEA-21 - Plus Law 105-178
Specialty Lamp International
Recalls Counterfeit Circuit Breakers
Wrongful Death
alleging death was caused by the conduct of negligent defendant.
Baltimore Strip Search Class Action
Judge Gives Go-ahead
Canceled Insurance
Judge orders Health Net Inc. to pay $9 million settlement after terminating a policyholder's policy after being diagnosed with breast cancer.
Labor and Delivery
Judge awards mother $6 million medical malpractice settlement after baby was born with brain injuries.
Taylor Bean Faces Federal WARN Class Action
Taylor Bean Federal Employment Class Action Filed

Inequitable Conduct Standard Remains Fluid in Praxair v. ATMI
Inequitable Conduct: Trends at the Federal Circuit
Finding of inequitable conduct without considering materiality vacated
Federal Circuit Holds That Inequitable Conduct Defense Properly Resolved By Court, Not Jury
Dickson Industries: Inequitable Conduct Holding Vacated
High materiality without explanation for nondisclosure leads to inference of intent to deceive








