14 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 204,929 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is 'genuine,' that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 189,377 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there cannot be a genuine issue of material fact where the nonmoving party fails to make a sufficient showing to establish the existence of an essential element
  3. Omega Engineering, Inc v. Raytek Corp.

    334 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,020 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the doctrine of prosecution disclaimer does not extend to situations where the supposed disavowal of claim scope is ambiguous
  4. Iron Grip Barbell Co. v. USA Sports, Inc.

    392 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2004)   Cited 124 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Noting that licenses "may constitute evidence of nonobviousness; however, only little weight can be attributed to such evidence if the patentee does not demonstrate a nexus between the merits of the invention and the licenses of record" (quoting In re GPAC Inc. , 57 F.3d 1573, 1580 (Fed. Cir. 1995) )
  5. North American Container v. Plastipak Pack

    415 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 111 times
    Holding that recapture rule applied to reissued claims that had been “enlarged” and were not “materially narrowed in other respects”
  6. Intellectual Prop. Dev., Inc. v. UA-Columbia Cablevision of Westchester, Inc.

    336 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 95 times
    Finding that the party seeking to invalidate a claim as indefinite must show by clear and convincing evidence that one skilled in the art would not understand the scope of the claim when read in light of the specification
  7. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 285,057 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  8. Section 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses

    35 U.S.C. § 282   Cited 3,665 times   122 Legal Analyses
    Granting a presumption of validity to patents
  9. Section 120 - Benefit of earlier filing date in the United States

    35 U.S.C. § 120   Cited 564 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Allowing filing as a continuation application if filed before all applications in the chain issue
  10. Section 122 - Confidential status of applications; publication of patent applications

    35 U.S.C. § 122   Cited 160 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Providing that with certain exceptions, "each application for a patent shall be published, in accordance with procedures determined by the Director, promptly after the expiration of a period of 18 months from the earliest filing date for which a benefit is sought under this title."
  11. Section 1.137 - Revival of abandoned application, or terminated or limited reexamination prosecution

    37 C.F.R. § 1.137   Cited 49 times   43 Legal Analyses

    (a)Revival on the basis of unintentional delay. If the delay in reply by applicant or patent owner was unintentional, a petition may be filed pursuant to this section to revive an abandoned application or a reexamination prosecution terminated under §1.550(d) or §1.957(b) or limited under §1.957(c). (b)Petition requirements. A grantable petition pursuant to this section must be accompanied by: (1) The reply required to the outstanding Office action or notice, unless previously filed; (2) The petition

  12. Section 1.213 - Nonpublication request

    37 C.F.R. § 1.213   Cited 5 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Including a certificate that the application will not be filed abroad
  13. Section 1.1 - Addresses for non-trademark correspondence with the United States Patent and Trademark Office

    37 C.F.R. § 1.1   Cited 4 times

    (a)In general. Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (a)(3)(ii), and (d)(1) of this section, all correspondence intended for the United States Patent and Trademark Office must be addressed to either "Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450" or to specific areas within the Office as set out in paragraphs (a)(1), and (a)(3)(iii) of this section. When appropriate, correspondence should also be marked for the attention of a particular

  14. Section 1.451 - The priority claim and priority document in an international application

    37 C.F.R. § 1.451   Cited 1 times
    Stating that a patent application receives a priority date of an earlier filed national or international application