Last Month at the Federal Circuit - June 2010


In this Issue:

*Court Finds No Inequitable Conduct Where Challenger Presented Evidence of Only Materiality

*Claims Are Construed in Light of the Originating Disclosure When a Party Challenges Written Description Support During an Interference Proceeding

*No Interference-in-Fact Exists Because, Applying the Proper Construction, Junior Patent Is Not Obvious over Senior Reissue Application

*Distinct Enantiomers Are Different “Drug Products” and Properly Subject to Statutory Term Extensions

*Based on Defendants’ Trade Show Visits to Nevada, Court Finds Exercise of Personal Jurisdiction Appropriate

*New and Improved Drug Product Eligible for Patent Term Extension Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 156

*Cancellation Fee Not Required at the “Motion for Leave to Amend” Stage


Please see full publication below for more information.

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

Written by:


Finnegan on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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. Or, sign up using your email address.