This week’s only precedential opinion has a non-practicing entity (NPE; previously known as “patent troll”) encountering patent invalidation due to anticipation and a less aggressive view of inequitable conduct.
In Orion IP LLC v. Hyundai Motor America, Hyundai stuck to its guns (or revved its engines) and fought the NPE all the way to the CFAC. After Hyundai was found to have infringed one of the asserted patents in the Eastern District of Texas District Court, the CAFC found that the patent asserted, a computerized part order system, was invalid because it was anticipated by a part order system available before the patent was filed. However, this panel of the CAFC found that the patent asserted was not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. The inequitable conduct analysis in this case should be contrasted to that of Tal-Tech (CAFC Weekly-May 14). In Orion IP, Judge Gajarsa wrote the opinion rather than the dissent!