"The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision affirming the summary judgment of invalidity of Definitive Holdings' patent under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)."
"Powerteq argued that by at least 1996, Hypertech Inc. sold a device that embodied all limitations of the asserted claims, leading to the patent's invalidity."
"Definitive Holdings contended that the facts relied on by Powerteq were based on inadmissible evidence, specifically challenging the deposition testimony of Hypertech's CEO."
The CAFC upheld the district court's ruling that Definitive Holdings' patent was invalid under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The patent, related to software upgrades in engine controllers, had a priority date of March 30, 2001, with a critical on-sale date of March 30, 2000. Powerteq successfully argued that a device sold by Hypertech Inc. in 1996 embodied all limitations of the patent claims. Definitive Holdings did not dispute the facts but challenged the admissibility of evidence presented by Powerteq.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]