Hologic, Inc., Cytyc Surgical Products v. Minerva Surgical, Inc.
The doctrine of assignor estoppel is still valid. However, the doctrine has limits on when it is applicable.
Results for Assignment
view Case Detail
Download PDF
Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc.
The doctrine of assignor estoppel is still valid. However, the doctrine has its limits on when it is applicable.
Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc.
The doctrine of assignor estoppel is still valid. However, the doctrine has its limits on when it is applicable.
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
A court considering a co-ownership claim of a past employer on a new invention of a past employee will refer to employment agreement language as well as whether or not the past employer’s claim to contribution was publically available when an application to cover the new invention is filed.
TriReme Medical, LLC v. AngioScore, Inc.
In general, work or consulting agreements will be construed based on the plain meaning of the words employed
Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems Inc.
A later-signed assignment stating a present assignment of rights may take precedence over an earlier assignment merely agreeing to assign rights in the future; the Bayh-Dole Act does not automatically void an otherwise valid prior contractual transfer of rights by an inventor; generally all co-owners must join as plaintiffs in an infringement suit.
Sicom Systems Ltd. V. Agilent Technologies, Inc.
Plaintiff licensee lacks standing to sue for infringement, even though license agreement grants plaintiff exclusive right to sue for commercial infringement, since licensor retains legal title to patent, and right to sue for infringement other than commercial infringement.
University of West Virginia, Board of Trustees v. VanVoorhies
A motion for relief under F.R.C.P. §§ 59(e) or 60(b) should be granted when the court’s exercise of discretion rests on an erroneous factual or legal premise.
Regents of the University of New Mexico v. Knight
Employees under an obligation of assignment of inventions to an institution were obligated to assign applications, including CIP applications and to cooperate in the prosecution of the applications.