United States Federal Circuit

In a patent dispute involving plaintiff's nondisclosure of three items of information during prosecution of the patent at issue, in a setting where the applicant had co-pending applications, a ruling that plaintiff's patent was unenforceable due to inequitable conduct before the PTO is affirmed where plaintiff failed to show clear error in the district court's findings regarding materiality or intent, or in its balancing thereof.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/18/2007
• Published 05/18/2007

Judges

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

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Daniel Johnson, Jr., Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant.   With him on the brief was Mark K. Dickson, Winston & Strawn LLP, of San Francisco, California.   Of counsel on the brief was Marcus T. Hall.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jose L. Patíno, Morrison & Foerster LLP, of San Diego, California, argued for defendant-appellee.   With him on the brief were Eric M. Acker and Katherine L. Parker.