Enhanced Pleading Requirments Apply in Patent Marking Cases


Allegations that a party falsely marked unpatented articles with a U.S. patent number must include facts from which a court may reasonably infer that the party acted with intent to deceive the public. So held the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in granting a relatively rare interlocutory writ of mandamus on 15 March 2011, ordering the corresponding district court to grant a motion to dismiss.

This decision clarifies the law regarding patent marking and may facilitate resolution of some of the recent flurry of lawsuits alleging false-marking violations.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Gary Colby | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »


Reporters on Deadline

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.