Digest of Troy v. Samson Mfg. Corp., No. 2013-1565 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2014) (precedential). On appeal from D. Mass. Before Prost, Bryson and Moore.

Procedural posture: Plaintiff appealed from district court’s judgment cancelling claims in an interference proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 146. CAFC vacated and remanded.

  • New Evidence on New Issues: The district court erred in refusing to consider new evidence of prior conception and actual reduction to practice pertaining to priority issues not previously raised before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. The Supreme Court held in Kappos v. Hyatt, 132 S. Ct. 1690 (2012), that there are no evidentiary restrictions beyond those already imposed by the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The CAFC concluded that Hyattapplies to actions under 35 U.S.C. § 145 and § 146. In holding that new evidence on new issues in a civil action is admissible, the CAFC remanded to the district court with instructions to consider the new evidence.

Hui Li