Newsletter presents concise summaries of important developments in U.S. patent law occurring during the month of September, 2008. Developments include:

1) Failure to obtain and produce opinion of counsel may be used as circumstantial evidence to support inducing infringement claim;

2) Inference of intent still alive as means to prove inequitable conduct;

3) PTO reexamination may be based on the same invalidity issue unsuccessfully raised in a district court litigation;

4) Accused infringer may not raise improper revival by the PTO as an invalidity defense

5) ?Point of novelty? test abolished;

6) Inventor?s testimony on his subjective intent in claiming the invention irrelevant to claim-construction analysis even if testimony is adverse to patentee;

7) Displaying product at a trade show is not ?use? infringement if product is not ?put into service?;

8) Single Species Does Not Provide Adequate Support for Generic Plasmid Claims;

9) Attempt to use extra-judicial help in forum to stop alleged infringement supported exercising personal jurisdiction over patentee;

10) Corresponding structure limited to specific subcomponent that performs function;

11) Patentee?s exhaustion of patent rights does not provide an affirmative claim of relief;

12) Federal Circuit urged to simplify the law on proving an earlier invention date;

13) Patent prosecution highway updates; and

14) Thomson-Reuters releases Matthews?s ?Patent Jury Instruction Handbook.?