THE MEDICINES COMPANY v. HOSPIRA, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – Products prepared by a supplier for commercial exploitation by the patentee trigger the on-sale bar

by Steve Driskill | Jul 2, 2015 | [sub] offer for sale, Prior Art

Products embodying the invention and prepared by a supplier for commercial exploitation by the patentee trigger the on-sale bar. Here, for example, a batch of pharmaceuticals marked by the supplier with commercial product codes and customer lot numbers and sent to the...

GLOBAL TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGIES v. MORGAN (Fed. Cir. 2015) (NP) – Physical space constraints are not dispositive of how a patentee is required to mark its commercial article

by Steve Driskill | Jun 4, 2015 | [sub] marking, Estoppel / Disclaimer

Physical space constraints are not dispositive of whether a patentee is required to mark its commercial article rather than its packaging. Here, for example, a traffic control system was found to be adequately marked by its packaging rather than its components even...

COMMIL USA, LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. (S. Ct. 2015) (P) – Even a good-faith belief of invalidity is not a defense to a claim of induced infringement

by Steve Driskill | May 26, 2015 | [sub] indirect, Infringement

Even a good-faith belief of invalidity is not a defense to a claim of induced infringement. Here, for example, a major supplier of wireless access points and controllers was found to be subject to liability for providing infringement-inducing products to consumers...

CADENCE PHARMACEUTICALS INC. v. EXELA PHARMA SCIENCES LLC (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – Equivalence infringement is not foreclosed simply by a literary “antithesis” of the claimed limitation

by Steve Driskill | Mar 23, 2015 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation

Infringement under the doctrine of equivalents is not foreclosed simply by the claimed limitation being the literary “antithesis” of the accused infringer’s corresponding feature. Here, for example, no substantial difference was found between deoxygenating before or...

SOUTHERN SNOW MANUFACTURING v. SNOWIZARD HOLDINGS (Fed. Cir. 2014) (NP) – Unassembled components still trigger on-sale bar when offered for sale

by Steve Driskill | Jun 30, 2014 | [sub] offer for sale, Prior Art

An offer for sale of the necessary components of the claimed invention triggers an on-sale bar even if the components require some assembly in order for the claimed invention to be put into operation.  “The law only requires that the invention be ‘ready for...