Can some claims in a patent remain valid if inequitable conduct is found?
No, according to MPEP 2016, if inequitable conduct is found, it affects all claims in the patent. The MPEP cites the case J. P. Stevens & Co. v. Lex Tex Ltd., which states: “Once a court concludes that inequitable conduct occurred, all the claims — not just the particular claims in which the inequitable conduct…
Read MoreWhat is the impact of fraud, inequitable conduct, or violation of duty of disclosure on patent claims?
According to MPEP 2016, a finding of fraud, inequitable conduct, or violation of duty of disclosure affects all claims in a patent application or patent, rendering them unpatentable or invalid. The MPEP states: “A finding of ‘fraud,’ ‘inequitable conduct,’ or violation of duty of disclosure with respect to any claim in an application or patent,…
Read MoreHow does the duty of disclosure relate to patent enforceability?
The duty of disclosure is closely tied to patent enforceability. According to MPEP 2016, a violation of the duty of disclosure can lead to all claims in a patent being unenforceable. The section states: “A finding of ‘fraud,’ ‘inequitable conduct,’ or violation of duty of disclosure with respect to any claim in an application or…
Read MoreWhat are the consequences of inequitable conduct in patent prosecution?
The consequences of inequitable conduct in patent prosecution are severe. MPEP 2016 outlines that such conduct leads to the unenforceability of the entire patent. As stated in the J. P. Stevens & Co. v. Lex Tex Ltd. case: “Inequitable conduct ‘goes to the patent right as a whole, independently of particular claims.’” This means that…
Read MoreWhat is the rationale behind the ‘all or nothing’ approach to patent unenforceability?
The ‘all or nothing’ approach to patent unenforceability due to inequitable conduct is based on the principle that such misconduct affects the entire patent right. MPEP 2016 cites the Gemveto Jewelry Co. v. Lambert Bros., Inc. case, which explains: “The gravamen of the fraud defense is that the patentee has failed to discharge his duty…
Read More