How do intervening rights affect patent infringement claims?

Intervening rights can significantly affect patent infringement claims in the following ways: They provide a defense against infringement for certain activities during the lapse period Absolute intervening rights protect specific items made, purchased, or used before reinstatement Equitable intervening rights may allow continued practice even after reinstatement They can limit the damages or remedies available…

Read More

How does the Hatch-Waxman Act affect patent infringement related to regulatory approval?

The Hatch-Waxman Act, codified in part as 35 U.S.C. 271(e), provides a safe harbor for certain activities that would otherwise be considered patent infringement. According to the MPEP: “Congress legislatively overruled Roche Products v. Bolar Pharmaceuticals, 733 F.2d 858, 221 USPQ 937 (Fed. Cir. 1984) as to products covered by 35 U.S.C. 271(e) and provided…

Read More

What is the doctrine of equivalents in patent law?

The doctrine of equivalents is a legal principle that arises in the context of patent infringement actions. As stated in MPEP 2186: “If an accused product or process does not literally infringe a patented invention, the accused product or process may be found to infringe under the doctrine of equivalents.” This doctrine allows for a…

Read More

How does the doctrine of equivalents relate to making a prima facie case of equivalence?

How does the doctrine of equivalents relate to making a prima facie case of equivalence? The doctrine of equivalents and making a prima facie case of equivalence are related concepts in patent law, but they apply in different contexts. The MPEP clarifies this relationship: “The determination of equivalence for purposes of the nonstatutory (obviousness-type) double…

Read More

How is the doctrine of equivalents applied in patent infringement cases?

The application of the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement cases involves a specific inquiry. According to MPEP 2186, the essential objective inquiry is: “Does the accused product or process contain elements identical or equivalent to each claimed element of the patented invention?” This inquiry, established in Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co., focuses…

Read More

What constitutes evidence of copying in patent cases?

Evidence of copying in patent cases can take various forms. According to MPEP 716.06, the Federal Circuit in Wyers v. Master Lock Co. stated that copying “requires evidence of efforts to replicate a specific product.” This can be demonstrated through: Internal company documents Direct evidence such as disassembling a patented prototype Photographing its features and…

Read More