Invalidating patent

Procedural history The procedural history is complicated but very important to the outcome of this case.

Here it is: The decision in the patent office proceedings was the first final judgment During the appeal of the damages award (item 8 above), Fresenius argued that the cancellation of the patent claims by the patent office extinguishes the cause of action for the infringement by Baxter.

The possibility existed that the two proceedings could reach different results.

Typically, the parallel proceedings did not reach different results for a variety of reasons.

The Federal Circuit held that although the district court entered a final judgment in 2007 for purposes of the appeal, the judgment was not final to preclude application of the intervening final judgment of the patent office re-examination.

For many years, there have been two paths to invalidate the claims of a U. For example, the defendant in a court proceeding would file a request for re-examination with the patent office.

In some situations, both the federal court proceeding and the patent office proceeding would occur on a parallel course.