all - Opinion Summaries

INT'L NUTRITION CO. v. HORPHAG RESEARCH LTD.

Intellectual Property, Patent, International Law
In a patent case, comity is appropriate where the foreign court merely determines who owns a US patent pursuant to a contract, because the question of...

DOOR-MASTER CORP. v. YORKTOWNE, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
A patent infringer's investigation of a patent, even if that investigation ultimately proves to be insufficient, combined with a finding that the case...

CHOU v. UNIV. OF CHICAGO

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent
A putative inventor has standing to sue to correct inventorship under 35 USC 256, even without a potential ownership interest in the patent, where the...

RAPOPORT v. DEMENT

Intellectual Property, Patent
Where the asserted prior art discusses treatment of a symptom, but does not anticipate that the discussed method would address the cause, the prior...

DUREL CORP. v. OSRAM SYLVANIA INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
The district court is free to use outside sources in its claim construction, such as calculations of atomic mass percent, but not if the resulting...

GART v. LOGITECH, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
The written description of a claim must explicitly limit the subject matter of the patent because drawings will only depict the preferred embodiment...

NILSSEN v. MOTOROLA, INC.

Civil Procedure, Injury & Tort Law, Intellectual Property, Patent
The district court must consolidate plaintiff's patent and trade secrets claims in district court because it was a mistake to separate the claims.

GROUP ONE, LTD. v HALLMARK CARDS, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
35 USC 102(b), the on-sale bar to patent validity, requires a definite formal offer for sale in the contracts sense.

BREED v. HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO.

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent
Federal Circuit Court of Appeal has appellate jurisdiction over suit that had patent claim even though there were 13 other non-patent claims and state...

ACROMED CORP. v. SOFAMOR DANEK GROUP, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
Uncorroberated testimony from someone claiming to have invented a process is not clear and convincing evidence sufficient to show invalidity.