My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

Powered by Rollyo

Blogroll Library Search

« Infringement Nation - Copyright 2.0 and You | Main | Announcing Version 2.0 of the E-Discovery Team Training Program »


patent litigation

The Court's ruling makes sense because of a very important point: Pentalpha did not tell its attorney that it had purchased and directly, deliberately copied the SEB fryer. If Pentalpha had informed its lawyer as to this fact, then the attorney likely would have found the patent. Because of this deliberate failure to inform the attorney of its copying, the prior art search was just a cover, and "willful blindness" makes complete sense. That considered, I'm glad this patent litigation went in favor of SEB.

The comments to this entry are closed.