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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results:1-6 of 6

Malpractice claim based on patent application belongs in federal court
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2012

A Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel has determined that (i) it had jurisdiction over an appeal from a district court order dismissing claims of fraud filed against lawyers who allegedly mishandled the plaintiff’s patent application and (ii) because the statute of limitations was tolled while related malpractice litigation was pending before a California state court, the lawsuit was timely filed in federal court.


U.S. Supreme Court opens 2011-2012 term with IP cases on its docket
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • October 7 2011

The U.S. Supreme Court returned for a new term on October 3, 2011, with two of the 48 cases already calendared for oral argument involving IP matters.


USPTO proposes rule to revise materiality standard after therasense decision
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2011

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced its plan to “revise the standard for materiality for the duty to disclose information in patent applications and reexamination proceedings in light of the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co.


SCOTUS to consider what new evidence may be introduced in Section 145 proceeding
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 30 2011

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear whether an unsuccessful patent applicant may introduce new evidence in a civil action filed under 35 U.S.C. 145 against the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), where the evidence could have been presented to the agency in her patent application.


Federal Circuit finds no limitation on new evidence in civil patent actions filed in district court
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 18 2010

A divided en banc Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that patent applicants who are dissatisfied with a Board of Patent Appeals (Board) determination and decide to pursue their claims in federal court under 35 U.S.C. 145, face no limitations on the right to introduce new evidence other than those pertaining to all civil actions under federal evidentiary and procedural rules.