United States Federal Circuit
Falana v. Kent State University, 2011-1198
In a suit against a university and inventors listed on a patent alleging that the plaintiff was an omitted co-inventor, the district court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiff as to inventorship is affirmed, where: 1) the district court did not err in construing the language of the claims; 2) error in the exclusion of certain exhibits did not result in substantial injustice and was harmless error; 3) the district court did not err in concluding that the plaintiff's contribution of the method used by the team of which he was a part for making the claimed compounds was enough of a contribution to conception to pass the threshold required for joint inventorship; and 4) the district court's exceptional case finding and award of attorney fees were not yet final and not properly before the court of appeals.
Appellate Information
- Decided 01/23/2012
- Published 01/23/2012
Judges
- Linn
Court
- United States Federal Circuit
Counsel
- For Appellant:
- Bruce H. Wilson, R. Eric Gaum