August 2007 (Part I) – Click for full issue

• Proving prior art is analogous art “goes a long way” to show a motivation to combine (CAFC)
• Substituting multiplexer for bus ruled obvious on JMOL motion despite jury verdict to contrary (N.D. Cal.)
• Internet-based patent survives § 103 attack (W.D. Pa.)
• Disavowal in specification limited claim scope to exclude accused product (CAFC)
• Accused infringer need not negotiate with a patentee who wants to negotiate rather than litigate, but may file a DJ action (CAFC)
• Prosecuting attorney identified in a judicial opinion as having committed inequitable conduct does not have the right to appeal (CAFC)
• Federal patent law preempts D.C. statute limiting what patentees could charge for patented drug products (CAFC)
• Foreign priority requires filing entity is acting on behalf of the named inventor at the time it files the foreign application (CAFC)
• Using tentative claim construction rulings in Markman procedures (N.D. Iowa)
• Patents held unenforceable for failing to disclose them to standard setting body (S.D. Cal.)
• Case or controversy requirement used by court to exclude products from suit (M.D. Pa)
• Failing to include material term when presenting settlement agreement in open court precluded later inclusion of the omitted term (S.D.N.Y.)
• PTO proposes rule changes to claims containing alternative language such as Markush claims

Posted in Patent Happening