Register | Login
Intellectual Property Today
RFC Express - Document Management System

CAFC Happenings

By John L. Rogitz of Rogitz & Associates

John Rogitz has conducted extensive domestic and foreign prosecution in the areas of computer hardware and software for high-tech institutions. He has also conducted extensive patent prosecution in the biomed field, including medical instrumentation, as well as in the fields of superconductors, magnetic resonance imaging, materials and consumer electronics. Mr. Rogitz can be reached at 619-338-8075.


Double Patenting; Inequitable Conduct:  Later patent with single claim to "metropolol succinate" invalid for obviousness-type double patenting over earlier patent (not co-owned) with claim to first and second layers covering a core selected from a list of eleven substances, including metropolol succinate; when failure to disclose inventorship issue is held on S/J to constitute inequitable conduct based on a "but-for" analysis that includes incentives to conceal which the prosecuting attorney during deposition disavowed knowledge of, S/J inappropriate, In re Metropolol Succinate Patent Litigation, no. 2006-1254.


Declaratory Judgment:  When accused infringer files counterclaims of invalidity in response to patent infringement complaint, and the infringement complaint is later dismissed before trial owing to emerging law (in this case, Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifescien...

To view the complete article you must be logged in
Login Now

Not A Member Yet? Sign Up For A Free 10 Day Trial Account!

  © Copyright 2010 Intellectual Property Today
Download Adobe Reader for free