Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Unreasonable Delay Results in Holding that Lemelson Patents are Unenforceable
In Symbol Techs, Inc. v. Lemelson Med. Educ., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1499 (D. Nev. 2004), the district court held that Lemelson's patents were unenforceable due to prosecution laches, where a patentee's right to claims can be forfeited if issued after an unreasonable delay in prosecution. The forfeit is possible even if a patentee complies with all of the statutes and rules. Patents invented by the late Jerome Lemelson are notorious for their length of prosecution time. In fact, Lemelson holds the top 13 positions for the longest patent prosecution time. The Lemelson patents at issue in the Symbol case were based on two applications filed in 1954 and 1956. Through continuation applications, filing delays and other prosecution delays, ranging in some cases from 18 to 39 years, the specification in the original application was modified to encompass practices used by the public. As a result, when the patents finally issued, Lemelson claimed that most of the practices in the bar code industry that previously had been freely practiced, infringed his patents. The court held that the delays in the prosecution were prejudicial to those in the industry, unexplained and unreasonable, and held that even though no laws were broken, the patents were unenforceable.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.