Noelle v. Lederman
In evaluating claims to determine whether an interference-in-fact exists, only the subject matter of the claims is to be evaluated, not otherwise disclosed but unclaimed subject matter.
Results for Interference
view Case Detail
Download PDF
Taskett v. Dentlinger
Determining that an invention would work for its intended purpose does not require that the invention be tested under conditions of actual, commercial use.
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Board of Regents of the University of Washington
In determining whether two claims claim the same patentable invention for purposes of an interference, the Director may employ a two-way test.
NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion Ltd.
Plaintiff is entitled to enhanced damages for infringement of patents for wireless e-mail transmission system, since defendant’s investigation of infringement accusations was insufficient to meet its duty of care, and in view of its significant investment income from infringing products, defendant can withstand award of enhanced damages.