1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Declarant’s Intentional Misrepresentation Not Remedied By Contradictory Supporting Exhibits

Declarant’s Intentional Misrepresentation Not Remedied By Contradictory Supporting Exhibits

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.26.07

In eSpeed, Inc. v. Brokertec USA, L.L.C., (No. 06-1385; March 20, 2007), the Federal Circuit affirms the district court’s judgment declaring a patent unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. eSpeed submitted three declarations and 1139 pages of supporting exhibits disclosing a prior system implemented by eSpeed. One of the declarations stated that the prior system did not include computer code that implements particular trading rules. The supporting exhibits, however, disclosed that the system included computer code for implementing those trading rules. Rejecting eSpeed’s argument the contradictory supporting exhibits vitiated the materiality of the false statements, the Federal Circuit holds that these false statements left the examiner with the impression that further investigation into the operation of the system was not required.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.31.26

DOJ Revitalizes Expedited Review Process for Second Requests, Giving Some Deals a Faster Path to Clearance

On July 23, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division announced that it will again use targeted Second Request investigations and released a revised Model Timing Agreement, another signal that this Antitrust Division continues to take a more business friendly approach toward merger review. The model introduces an optional “Expedited Consideration” process that gives merging parties the option to address discrete competitive concerns identified by the DOJ before undertaking full Second Request compliance....