Federal Case Summaries
Coverage since November 3, 1994

Federal

Uncategorized

In re EchoStar Communications Corp. — Asserting Advice-of-Counsel Defense Waives Privilege for All Related Communications, But Not All Work Product

The Federal Circuit held that when a patent defendant asserts an advice-of-counsel defense to willful infringement, it waives attorney-client privilege for all communications about the patent’s validity, enforceability, and infringement — but the waiver does not automatically extend to all att

Uncategorized

Atofina v. Great Lakes Chemical Corp. — Narrower Claimed Range Is Not Anticipated by Broader Prior Art Range Without Specific Disclosure of the Narrower Range

The Federal Circuit reversed a finding of anticipation, holding that a prior art reference disclosing a broad temperature range of 100–500°C did not anticipate a claimed narrower range of 330–450°C — a genus does not anticipate every species, and a broader prior art range anticipates a narrower clai

Uncategorized

SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp. — Product-by-Process Patent Claims Are Anticipated If the Product Itself Was Previously Known, Regardless of Process

The Federal Circuit affirmed invalidity of SmithKline’s Paxil patent, holding that product-by-process claims are anticipated by prior art that discloses the same product, even when the prior art used a different process to make it — because patents protect products, not processes, under such c

Uncategorized

Ferring B.V. v. Barr Laboratories — Concealed Declarant Affiliations Constitute Inequitable Conduct When Examiner Has Specifically Requested Independent Evidence

The Federal Circuit affirmed patent unenforceability for inequitable conduct, holding that pharmaceutical patent applicants who submitted declarations from scientists with undisclosed financial ties to the patent owner engaged in deceptive conduct that was material because the patent examiner had sp

Uncategorized

Digital Control Inc. v. Charles Machine Works — Multiple Materiality Standards Coexist for Inequitable Conduct; False Rule 131 Declarations Are Inherently Material

The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded in a horizontal directional drilling patent case, holding that the 1992 PTO Rule 56 materiality standard supplements rather than replaces the earlier ‘reasonable examiner’ standard, that false statements in a Rule 131 declaration are inherently ma

Scroll to Top