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 Andrew Siuta and Lauren Matturri Anyone who plays video games will tell you that the characters in these games are just as important as the plot. However, when it comes to intellectual property protection, [Read More…]
Downtime sharpens focus and gives us time to disrupt. WHIPgroup has done exactly that and now offers a new paradigm for IP Counsel. The hourly rate is dead for patent and trademark prosecution. Fixed fees [Read More…]
WHIPgroup seamlessly transitioned to a work from home virtual office for all employees without interruption last Friday. WHIPgroup was founded with the philosophy of embracing technology to raise quality while keeping costs down and improving [Read More…]