Accused Infringer Uses Reexamination To Defeat Willfulness Allegation
Scott Daniels, partner at Westerman, Hattori, Daniels & Adrian LLP and Practice Center Contributor, sent along his analysis on the recent District Court decision, Plumley v. Mockett. In a decision that may surprise many, the District Court held that the accused infringer may use reexamination to obtain summary judgment of no willful infringement. According to Daniels, “the first goal of a third party requesting reexamination is to invalidate the patent claims. But even if the Patent Office confirms the validity of the claims, the reexamination may significantly benefit the requester on other issues, such as claim construction, infringement, and inequitable conduct.”
Below is Scott Daniels’ analysis…
A party accused of patent infringement requests reexamination at the PTO to attack the patent as being anticipated or obvious in view of a prior art patent or printed publication. An accused infringer, however, may also achieve other less obvious goals by seeking reexamination, such as creating an estoppel, creating a disclaimer limiting claim scope, or establishing the materiality of a prior art reference for an inequitable conduct defense. Or, as in Plumley v. Mockett, the accused infringer may use reexamination to obtain summary judgment of no willful infringement. 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57254 (C.D. Cal. May 26, 2010). (more…)
No Comments
06.21.10 | District Court Cases, Patent Litigation, posts, Reexamination Requests | Stefanie Levine