Patents are never invalid, only their claims. This was quickly discussed by the Federal Circuit in Sophos Inc. v. RPost Holdings, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2019) in reviewing a district court’s Order granting summary judgment that suggested a patent was invalid. (“[T]he Court concludes that the ’628 patent is invalid.”) The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the district court to revise its judgment and clarify that the declaration of invalidity is limited to challenged claims of the patent.
This is an important distinction often overlooked by inventors and conveniently ignored by infringers. Whether a patent is invalid or infringed is determined on a claim-by-claim basis. This is the reason WHIPgroup regularly recommends filing continuation applications with various levels of protection (e.g. both narrow and broad claims). Thus, even if an infringer successfully finds invalidating prior art for some or all claims of one patent, it is still possible to obtain strong valid claims in a continuation application that are infringed.
WHIPgroup is leading counsel for U.S. and international technology companies. We specialize in patent and trademark law.
By: Benjamin N. Luehrs Generic forum selection clauses in patent license agreements can prevent licensees from trying to invalidate licensed patents at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). A recent Federal Circuit Opinion, [Read More…]
WHIPgroup obtained another patent allowance just by filing an Appeal Brief. The application relates to a medical shaft instrument having a force transmission element that provides torsional and axial rigidity. The Examiner had rejected the [Read More…]
By Patrick D. Duplessis These days it seems almost every article or news report about self-driving vehicles (SDVs) includes the prophecy that the automobile will soon resemble a “smartphone on wheels.” That oft-repeated phrase alludes [Read More…]