We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.


Clear all

Refine your search

Content type



5 results found


Winston & Strawn LLP | USA | 16 Nov 2010

Cancer Research Tech. Ltd. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc

The defense of prosecution laches requires a finding of prejudice as shown by evidence of intervening rights; for inequitable conduct, a finding of intent to deceive cannot rely solely on the same evidence used to support a finding of materiality.


Winston & Strawn LLP | USA | 15 Jun 2010

Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc v Universal Security Instruments, Inc, 2009-1421

Whether the inventorship of the patents as issued is correct does not determine the materiality of the statements in this case, just as whether concealed prior art would actually invalidate the patent is irrelevant to materiality


Winston & Strawn LLP | USA | 2 Feb 2010

Therasense, Inc v Becton, Dickinson and Co

To anticipate, a prior art reference must disclose, either expressly or inherently, all of the elements of the claim arranged or combined in the same way as recited in the claim.

Previous page 1 Next page