Newsletter
| March 1, 2010
Comaper Corp. v. Antec, Inc.
A broader independent claim cannot be nonobvious where a dependent claim stemming from that independent claim is invalid for obviousness.
On March 1, 2010, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the district court’s judgment entering the jury verdict that Antec willfully infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,955,955, which related to a cooling device designed to mount within the drive bay of a computer, and that certain claims of the patent, but not others, were invalid for obviousness.
For more information, please contact your Dewey & LeBoeuf relationship partner, or one of the following:
This memorandum is intended only as a general discussion of these issues. It is not considered to be legal advice. We would be pleased to provide additional details or advice about specific situations. For additional information on this important topic, please feel free to call upon your Dewey & LeBoeuf relationship partner. No part of this publication may be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form, without our prior written consent.
For further information on Dewey & LeBoeuf, please visit www.dl.com. +1 888 532 6383