Groups
Groups
Sign in
Groups
Groups
PatentPod.com
Conversations
About
Send feedback
Help
[Patent Pod] Pharmacia v. Par Pharmaceutical
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Andrew Lahser
unread,
Aug 16, 2005, 12:58:35 AM
8/16/05
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to mypat...@googlegroups.com
[
http://www.patentpod.com/sound/2005/august/Pharmacia-v-Par-Pharmaceutical.mp3
]
Inequitable conduct that invalidates one patent will not invalidate the other patent when the patents are merely tied by a terminal disclaimer.
MP3:
Pharmacia v. Par Pharmaceutical (Fed. Cir. 2005) (citations omitted)
PDF:
Pharmacia v. Par Pharmaceutical (Fed. Cir. 2005) (full text)
Patent Prospector:
Trying To Tie With a Terminal Disclaimer
Patently-O:
Terminal Disclaimer Does Not Bind Two Patents For Purposes of Inequitable Conduct Unenforceability
IP-Updates:
Terminal Disclaimer Did Not Bind Patents for Unenforceability
--
Posted by Andrew Lahser to
Patent Pod
at 8/15/2005 09:46:00 PM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages