United States Federal Circuit

Regarding a DNA polymerase chain reaction invention, the district court did not clearly err in 1) finding that the inventors misrepresented the prior art enzyme and its activity as compared to that of the claimed enzyme, and 2) its finding of materiality with respect to the fidelity issue.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/31/2003
• Published 03/31/2003

Judges

• Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, ARCHER, Senior Circuit Judge, and BRYSON, Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Jennifer Gordon,Pennie & Edmonds LLP, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiffs-appellants.   With her on the brief were Todd A. Wagner and Todd L. Krause.   Of counsel on the brief were Barbara A. Caulfield, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, of San Francisco, CA. Of counsel were S. Leslie Misrock, Pennie & Edmonds;  Heidi Keefe, and Myra J. Pasek, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.


• For Appellees:
  
• James R. Troupis, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, of Madison, WI, argued for defendant-appellee.   With him on the brief were Michael E. Husmann, J. Donald Best, John C. Scheller, and Karla M. Davis.   Of counsel on the brief were Peter G. Carroll and Kamrin T. MacKnight, Medlen & Carroll LLP, of San Francisco, CA;  and Russell L. Johnson, Skjerven, Morrill, MacPherson, Franklin & Friel LLP, of San Jose, CA.