Federal Circuit Patent Updates - September 2009

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - September 2009

Publication

View previous month...

In Re Skvorecz (Newman, Friedman, Mayer)

September 9, 2009 3:08 PM

(Newman) Reversing rejections of reissue patent application for wire chafing stand based on anticipation, indefiniteness and written description.

A full version of the text is available here.

Martek Biosciences Corp. v. Nutrinova, Inc. (Newman, Lourie, Rader, Gajarsa, Moore)

September 9, 2009 3:05 PM

(Gajarsa) Affirming denial of JMOL and reversing grant of JMOL of patents directed to to microorganisms useful for production of a fatty acid. An adequate written description does not necessarily require a working example. Although the claim required that the product be functionally different than another product, sufficient evidence was introduced of infringement without any testing. An abandoned patent application was not sufficient to corroborate a claim of prior inventorship. With respect to another patent, an independent claim was invalid for lack of enablement where it broadly covered many thousands of species, but dependent claims were enabled given their narrower scope, Lourie dissented on an issue of clam interpretation.

A full version of the text is available here.

Nystrom v. Trex Co., Inc. (Michel, Rader, Prost)

September 9, 2009 3:01 PM

(Rader) Affirming dismissal of patent infringement claim based on res judicata. For claim preclusion to operate, the accused infringer must show that the accused product is "essentially the same" as the accused product or process in the first suit. This requirement is only applicable to the pertinent claim limitations that formed the basis of the non-infringement judgment in the first suit. Rader concurred, to discuss issues relating to claim vitiation.

A full version of the text is available here.

Notice

Unless you are an existing client, before communicating with WilmerHale by e-mail (or otherwise), please read the Disclaimer referenced by this link.(The Disclaimer is also accessible from the opening of this website). As noted therein, until you have received from us a written statement that we represent you in a particular manner (an "engagement letter") you should not send to us any confidential information about any such matter. After we have undertaken representation of you concerning a matter, you will be our client, and we may thereafter exchange confidential information freely.

Thank you for your interest in WilmerHale.