United States Federal Circuit
MEDICHEM, S.A. v. ROLABO, S.L., 02-1461, 02-1480
Because it failed to recognize that claims 1 and 2 of plaintiff's patent plainly anticipate claims 1 and 17 of defendant's patent, the district court prematurely concluded that no interference-in-fact existed. Given that it did not identify an interference-in-fact, the court lacked jurisdiction to make a priority determination between the two patents per 35 U.S.C. section 291.
Appellate Information
- Decided 12/23/2003
- Published 12/23/2003
Judges
- GAJARSA, Circuit Judge., Before CLEVENGER, GAJARSA, and DYK, Circuit Judges.
Court
- United States Federal Circuit
Counsel
- For Appellant:
- Barry S. White,Frommer Lawrence & Haug LLP, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were James K. Stronski, Tedd W. Van Buskirk, and John G. Taylor.
- For Appellees:
- Katherine W. Schill, Michael Best & Friedrich, LLP, of Milwaukee, WI, argued for defendant-cross appellant. On the brief were Jeffrey S. Ward, Thomas P. Heneghan, Shane A. Brunner, and Charlene L. Yager, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, of Madison, WI.