Blog

This article was originally published in the Greater Bridgeport Bar Association’s News Brief, Click Here to download Dur-A-Flex, Inc., based in East Hartford, is preparing for trial on a trade secret misappropriation case in May 2018, in Hartford Superior Court (HHD-CV14-6049281-S).  In January, Dur-A-Flex filed a Motion to Seal, asking the […]

The Dilworth IP Team is excited to run in support the Hole in the Wall Gang, a charitable organization founded by Paul Newman in 1988. The charity runs camps and various other programs across the Northeast for seriously ill children and their families. On June 2nd, team members Michael Dilworth, Bill Reid, and […]

Dilworth IP is proud to have been a sponsor for the fifty-five Connecticut students who traveled to the National Invention Convention and Entrepreneurship Expo (NICEE) in Washington, D.C. A ceremony was held by Governor Dannel Malloy on Friday, May 20th at the State’s Capitol to see the young inventors off as they headed to the event. Dilworth IP’s Frederick Spaeth, who was present for the ceremony, said “it was a such a pleasure to see so much enthusiasm from the students as they headed to the convention. I think the event is a fantastic way to teach the practical process of protecting their creative ideas.”

Dilworth IP Partners Dr. Anthony Sabatelli and Mr. Frederick Spaeth will be presenting a talk on Intellectual Property basics at the Quinnipiac University Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship on Friday March 4th at 12:00 PM. The talk will be geared toward prospective inventors and entrepreneurs and will cover key events over the life of a patent, common concerns of the patent process and patentability in biotechnology. For more information on the event, please contact QUCIE@quinnipiac.edu.

Dilworth IP will be hosting an afternoon seminar on Wednesday, April 29th at 1:30pm at the Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC), 5th Floor 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA. Dr. Anthony Sabatelli and Dr. Cambria Alpha-Cobb will address many common questions about the patent process. The talk will be geared toward inventors and entrepreneurs alike.

Patent Basics for Entrepreneurs: Ever wondered which of your ideas were patentable? What is the first step towards applying for a patent? Why do patents even exist? During this seminar we discuss the flow between inventions and patents, how a patent works, the time line to getting a patent, in addition to highlighting some examples and recent trends from the US patent and trademark office. Following will be a question and answer session to address further questions on basic patent law! Light snacks to ward off the post-lunch slump.

Frederick Spaeth, Partner at Dilworth IP, will be presenting at the Joint Patent Practice Seminar at the Marriott Marquis in NYC on May 12th. Fred will be speaking briefly as part of a panel which will discuss the impact on patent law of recent and various Supreme Court decisions. His talk is entitled The Nautilus Decision Defines the Test for Indefiniteness: Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments.

On October 15, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz, a case that concerns the amount of deference the Federal Circuit must afford a district court’s construction of patent claims.

Teva, owner of patents on the multiple sclerosis drug Copaxone®, contends that claim construction is intertwined with fact finding, that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) should apply to claim construction, and that a district court’s claim construction should only be set aside for clear error. In short, the Federal Circuit’s long-standing practice of de novo review of claim construction—which was validated by the Supreme Court’s 1996 decision in Markman v. Westview Instruments and confirmed by the Federal Circuit (6-4) en banc in February 2014 in Lighting Ballast Control v. Philips Electronics—should be overruled.

Sandoz and other generic drug makers counter that Markman remains good law, that Rule 52(a) applies to fact finding outside the context of claim construction, that claim construction is a purely legal matter best left in the hands of a judge rather than a jury, that the current law promotes uniformity and predictability, and that the Federal Circuit correctly reviews claim construction de novo.

Which side will prevail? Who won the oral argument? Which justices will reverse their position almost two decades post-Markman?

We’ll review important background decisions, analyze the briefs, dissect the justices’ questions, and speculate about how the Supreme Court will rule. Join us—it should be “worth the candle”!