Intellectual Property Law

Judge Farnan: Typographical error does not deprive plaintiff of standing to sue

By Karen E. Keller, Andrew A. Lundgren et al.

After a jury trial returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff, Judge Farnan recently presided over a bench trial on the issue of plaintiff?s standing. The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (Canada), et al., C.A. 05-737-JJF (D. Del. July 30, 2010). Plaintiff and its subsidiary entered into an agreement to transfer certain patent rights from plaintiff to the subsidiary. The issue before Judge Farnan was whether this agreement transferred ownership of the patents-in-suit such that plaintiff no longer had standing. Id. at 3. Judge Farnan concluded that plaintiff was the legal owner of the patents at all relevant times throughout the litigation. Id. at 6. Patents were transferred under the agreement once they were listed on a Schedule A to the agreement. Id. Defendants argued that the patents were transferred because there was no Schedule A to the agreement. Id. at 7. However, plaintiff presented evidence that a document entitled ?Schedule B Supplement ? Patent Rights? was intended to be Schedule A and reference to Schedule B was a typographical error. Id.

The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (Canada), et al., C.A. 05-737-JJF (D. Del. July 30, ...

Full post as published by Delaware IP Law Blog on August 02, 2010 (boomark / email).