For Your Data Walker Procedure Equipment Inc. V. Nutrient Mechanism & Chemic Corp. Instance Brief Summary
August 30, 2019
Edit
Walker Process Equipment Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp. case brief summary
Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical … - Supreme Court
FACTS
Defendant inwards a conform for patent infringement (Walker) counterclaims for violation of § two of the Sherman Act as well as § iv of the Clayton Act yesteryear using a patent obtained through intentional fraud to exclude it from the market.
HOLDING
The Court holds that Walker's counterclaim is valid, but needs to genuinely attempt all elements of a § two claim inwards add-on to knowingly as well as willfully misrepresent facts (good organized faith of Food Machinery would travel consummate defense) to the U.S.P.T.O.
DISCUSSION
Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical … - Supreme Court
FACTS
Defendant inwards a conform for patent infringement (Walker) counterclaims for violation of § two of the Sherman Act as well as § iv of the Clayton Act yesteryear using a patent obtained through intentional fraud to exclude it from the market.
HOLDING
The Court holds that Walker's counterclaim is valid, but needs to genuinely attempt all elements of a § two claim inwards add-on to knowingly as well as willfully misrepresent facts (good organized faith of Food Machinery would travel consummate defense) to the U.S.P.T.O.
DISCUSSION
- Patent is for "knee-action swing diffusers used aeration equipment for sewage handling systems" which was alleged inwards purpose for to a greater extent than than a twelvemonth prior to the patent application was filed yesteryear Food Machinery (and Δ was using it, as well as then it must direct keep known).
Analysis
- These cases (exclusion through invalid patents) are never brought yesteryear DOJ, but nigh ever raised inwards defence of patent infringement claims.
- Walker Process is probable express to patents obtained via fraud because otherwise it provides a disincentive to begin patents as well as an incentive to purpose other methods of protecting intellectual property—e.g. merchandise secrets—which are less transparent as well as less desired.
NOTES
Patents are extremely powerful—even without the litigation, patents are frequently used effectively—yet in that place is extremely express exam of the patent application yesteryear the USPTO.
Counterclaim Process/Test
- Π shows prima facie instance that patent was obtained fraudulently
- Δ has practiced organized faith defense.
- Π must attempt monopolization nether Sherman § 2.
- Prove monopoly ability inwards a relevant market—and a patent may non plow over monopoly ability yesteryear default if in that place are acceptable substitutes inwards the market, e.g. option pharmaceuticals.
- Prove a bad act—sham litigation is sufficient but is precisely showing the patent as well as requesting that the other political party desist a bad act? The presumption that a patent monopolizes merchandise inside the pregnant of § two was dismissed yesteryear the Court inwards Ill. Tool Works v. Independent Ink (1965) at 1195.