"Improper Revival" Not A Cognizable Defense In An Action Involving The Validity Or Infringement Of A Patent
Sep.24.2008
In Aristocrat Technologies Australia PTY Ltd. v. International Game Tech. (No. 2008-1016; Sept. 22, 2008), the Federal Circuit reverses a district court's grant of summary judgment that U.S. Patent No. 7,056,215 ("the '215 patent"), and the continuation patent that followed it, are invalid on the grounds that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office "improperly revived" the '215 patent after it was abandoned during prosecution. The Federal Circuit holds that "improper revival" is not a cognizable defense in an action involving the validity or infringement of a patent, reasoning that the proper revival of an abandoned application is not a defense recognized by the patent statute nor is it a ground specified in the patent statute as a condition for patentability.
[http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1016.pdf]
For more information, please contact the professional(s) listed below, or your regular Crowell & Moring contact.