United States Federal Circuit

In a patent dispute, the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendant is reversed where the district court failed to analyze evidence supporting plaintiff's claim that three inventors were employees of the plaintiff at the time of the invention.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/15/2005
• Published 03/15/2005

Judges

• PROST, Circuit Judge., Before BRYSON, GAJARSA, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Peter J. Toren, Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP, of New York, New York, argued for movants-appellants.   With him on the brief was James D. Arden.   Of counsel on the brief were Jeffrey M. Olson and Robert A. Holland, of Los Angeles, California and Richard F. O'Malley, Jr., of Chicago, Illinois.   Also of counsel was Kathi A. Cover, of Washington, DC., Thomas L. Hamlin, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P., of Minneapolis, Minnesota, argued for plaintiff-appellant.   With him on the brief were Tara D. Sutton, David S. Toepfer, Stephen P. Safranski, and Nicole E. Narotzky.


• For Appellees:
  
• Robert D. Bajefsky, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P., of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees Amgen Inc., et al.   With him on the brief was William L. Strauss.   Of counsel on the brief were Stuart L. Watt, Monigue L. Cordray, and Karen L. Nicastro, Amgen Inc., of Thousand Oaks, California., Nicholas Groombridge, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, of New York, New York, argued for defendant-appellee Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd. With him on the brief were Elizabeth S. Weiswasser, David Greenbaum and Daniel J. Melman.