Inequitable Conduct in Recent Federal Circuit Decisions and International Patent Prosecution

1
Inequitable Conduct in Recent Federal Circuit
Decisions and International Patent Prosecution

• Jay P. Kesan
• University of Illinois College of Law

2
Inequitable ConductAs a Defense (1)

• Definition
• Breach of duty of candor, good faith and honesty
• Elements of inequitable conduct
• What IC is not
• PTO does not investigate IC

3
Inequitable ConductAs a Defense (2)

• Relationship to common law fraud
• No right to jury trial
• Summary judgments based on IC
• Burden of proof
• Appellate review

4
Elements of Inequitable Conduct

• Careful balancing test intent and materiality
• Materiality
• Knowledge
• Intent

5
International Patent Prosecution

• Appropriate manner and time to file an IDS
• Listing requirement
• Filed separately from specification
• Copy of each document
• Timely filing
• SEL v. Samsung, 204 F.3d 1368 (2000)
• Li v. Toshiba, 231 F.3d 1373 (2001)
• Harris v. Ericsson, 194 F.Supp.2d 533 (2002)
• Marlow v. Igloo, 2002 WL 485698 (N.D. Tex. 2002).
• Careful balancing test intent and materiality
• Materiality
• Knowledge
• Intent

6
Does the Inequitable Conduct Defense Make Sense?

• Imposing a duty to disclose on the better
  informed party is sound
• Information-forcing function
• Incentive to disclose because of reduction in
  post-issuance invalidation risk
• Difficulty in setting the right standard to
  discourage IC assertions in every case without
  diluting incentive to divulge information.