Invalidating a patent
Invalidating a patent - printable dating contract teenager
Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim. The burden of establishing invalidity of a patent or any claim thereof shall rest on the party asserting such invalidity.Since its inception in 1982, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has read this provision as requiring that for a party challenging the validity of a granted patent in proceedings before a court to succeed it bore the burden of producing clear and convincing evidence to support of its factual assertions.
35 USC 282 states: A patent shall be presumed valid.I currently work for a company being sued by a patent troll. 50 companies are being sued for infringing upon this patent. After tons of digging, I found prior art that existed before the patent was filed.What does our attorney need to do now once I give him proof of prior art?I'm sure the attorney can figure out what to do with it depending on how on-target it is. From previous postings on Ask Patents you can see that many things people originally think are killer prior art turn out to be something the patentee long ago informed the examiner of or have otherwise been fully considered during the prosecution of the application.(Not that I think they directly copied me, it was likely just multiple invention.) Considering I'm not going to spend money trying to defend something I never intended to profit from in the first place, is there anything I can do to invalidate the patent so no one has an exclusive right to it, or at least help weaken it? (Postings on forums or now-defunct wikis, Google Docs, etc., all seen by only a handful of people...) How much detail would my postings need to be considered prior art?
What if, in private, I had sufficiently detailed the workings to constitute prior art, but my public postings didn't contain enough detail?To qualify as prior art, a reference needs a verifiable date attached to it.Depending on the provenance, a blog posting might suffice in and of itself.In most civil proceedings, however, the requirement is simply for the party asserting a particular fact to establish that it is true by a preponderance of the evidence (that is that is is more likely than not that the fact asserted is true).There are, however, situations in civil proceedings where the courts recognize that something more than the mere likelihood that an asserted fact is true is necessary before the court can rely on it.I imagine you can just make sure the people handling the case are aware of what you found.