Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 JULY 2013

Best Mode Violation Requires Intentional Concealment

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

In a recent case, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's entry of SJ of invalidity on best mode grounds, affirmed that U.S. Patent No. 5,011,339 was not abandoned, and remanded for further infringement proceedings.

United StatesIntellectual Property

In Ateliers de la Haute-Garonne v. Broetje Automation USA Inc., Nos. 12-1038, -1077 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2013), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's entry of SJ of invalidity on best mode grounds, affirmed that U.S. Patent No. 5,011,339 ("the '339 patent") was not abandoned, and remanded for further infringement proceedings.

Ateliers de la Haute-Garonne and F2C2 Systems S.A.S. (collectively "AHG") sued Broetje Automation USA Inc. and Brötje Automation GmbH (collectively "Broetje"), asserting infringement of the '339 patent and U.S. Patent No. 5,143,216 ("the '216 patent").  Both patents are entitled "Process for Distribution of Pieces such as Rivets, and Apparatus for carrying out the Process."  The '339 and '216 patents relate to the dispensing of objects such as rivets through a pressurized tube with grooves along its inner surface, providing a rapid and smooth supply of properly positioned rivets for such uses as the assembly of metal parts of aircraft.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from