"Improper Revival" Not A Cognizable Defense In An Action Involving The Validity Or Infringement Of A Patent
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.24.08
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.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 15 min read | 08.20.25
In this eighth alert in our weekly series on the EU Pharma Package, we continue our overview of initiatives with respect to security of supply and shortage prevention and mitigation. Our last alert looked at how the Pharma Package seeks to address these issues. However, the Pharma Package does not exist in isolation, and in this alert we will discuss the interplay between its measures and those contained in other important EU initiatives such as the proposed Critical Medicines Act (CMA), and the Medicinal Countermeasures Strategy and the EU Stockpiling Strategy.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.19.25
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.19.25
Forged Faces, Real Liability: Deepfake Laws Take Effect in Washington State and Pennsylvania
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.19.25
