Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Federal Circuit Attempts to Right the Inequitable Conduct Ship
The patent application process ' referred to as patent prosecution ' is ex parte. To ensure the integrity of the application process, patent applicants have a duty to prosecute patents with candor, good faith, and honesty. A breach of that duty raises the defense of inequitable conduct. Inequitable conduct typically requires proof that: 1) the patentee withheld material information or made a material misrepresentation; and 2) the patentee did so with the intent to deceive the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Federal Circuit”) has long maintained a high bar for proving inequitable conduct. This high bar is appropriate given the severity of the remedy ' unenforceability of the entire patent ' and the relative ease of using hindsight to find fault with the prosecution of a patent. Several recent decisions, however, have pointed toward a sinking standard for proving inequitable conduct, which has created an atmosphere of uncertainty about the proper scope of the inequitable conduct defense. The Federal Circuit's recent opinion on the subject, Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 537 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2008), appears to be an attempt to right the ship by reiterating the standards for proving inequitable conduct that were established more than 20 years ago.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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 Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
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.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
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.
How AI Has Affected PR
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 DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
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.