• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patent
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Application
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademark
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent Infringement / Patent Infringement Defenses / Inequitable conduct / Federal Circuit Resets the Rules for Inequitable Conduct

Federal Circuit Resets the Rules for Inequitable Conduct

June 6, 2011 by James Yang

Updated: January 20, 2022

Inequitable conduct is a charge made by defendants in a patent infringement lawsuit to avoid liability for infringement of a patent. Inequitable conduct occurs when an applicant or someone associated with the filing of a patent application misleads a patent examiner that it warrants the court to make the patent unenforceable.

Over a period of time, the courts have reduced the standards for winning on a charge of inequitable conduct to foster full disclosure to the PTO. Unfortunately, the lower threshold has had many unforeseen and unintended consequences. About 80 percent of all patent infringement lawsuits include a charge of inequitable conduct. Charges of inequitable conduct have become a significant litigation strategy, expand discovery, paint the patentee as a bad actor, etc.

The Federal Circuit, recognizing these unfortunate consequences, has now significantly raised the standard to win on a charge of inequitable conduct. This means that more patents will be enforceable and that the patentee’s position has become stronger during license negotiation, preliminary stages of a dispute, and litigation.

In Therasense v. Becton, the Federal Circuit held that to win on a charge of inequitable conduct, there must be a showing of specific intent to deceive and materiality. The intent to deceive requires a specific intent to deceive the Patent Office which cannot be shown by showing gross negligence, negligence under a should have known standard. Under the old standard, intent could be shown under the should have known standard. The defendant must now show that the applicant made a deliberate decision to deceive. The specific intent to deceive must be shown to be the most reasonable inference drawn from the evidence. There is no specific intent to deceive if there are multiple reasonable inferences based on the evidence.

As to materiality, the withheld information must be the but-for cause of the patent’s issuance. If but for the withheld or misrepresented information, the patent office would not have granted the patent then the withheld or misrepresented information is material. In essence, before inequitable conduct will be found, the accused infringer must invalidate the patent using the wrongful act or withheld information.

The court further recognized an egregious misconduct exception to the materiality standard. When the patentee has engaged in affirmative acts of egregious misconduct, such as making false or misleading statements in a declaration under a penalty of perjury, then the misconduct is material.

This new standard for materiality no longer corresponds to the Patent Office’s definition of material in Rule 56. The Court reasoned that the broader standard used by the Patent Office played a part in the unforeseen and untended consequences mentioned above.

Under the old standard, both intent and materiality were required to win on inequitable conduct. The intent and materiality prongs were previously viewed on a sliding scale. If the evidence for the intent was weak but the information was highly material or if the evidence on intent was strong but the information was not as material, one could win on the charge of inequitable conduct. But under this new standard, there is no sliding scale. Also, the standards for both intent to deceive and materiality have been significantly raised.

I invite you to contact me with your patent questions at (949) 433-0900 or [email protected]. Please feel free to forward this article to your friends. As an Irvine patent attorney, I serve Orange County, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and surrounding cities.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on the patent process.

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Prosecution Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney