As a community service, an educational series by the

IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq.

Copyright 2010 The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq. All Rights Reserved.

Return to Index of Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

HOLDING: (1) The CAFC may not routinely vacate declaratory judgments on validity, even if there is no on-going dispute. The CAFC needs to review the declaratory judgment because of the public interest in resolving patent validity and to preserve the value to a successful litigant in the declaratory judgment (2) An unusual case might justify vacation. The Court provided no guidance as to what is an unusual case. (3) The holding does not pertains to trial courts (for trial courts, there needs to be a present controversy.) (4) The holding does not pertain to the Federal Circuit vacating unnecessary findings of validity under an affirmative defense where the patent is held not infringed.

CARDINAL CHEMICAL v. MORTON INTERNATIONAL, 508 U.S. 83 (May 17, 1993)

 

FACTS: The CAFC had a routine practice that after affirming a judgment of non-infringement, it vacated a declaratory judgment on validity. This practiced was challenged.

Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

***

A Fast and Easy Way to Learn the High Points of Patent Law and Related Anti-trust Law

Community Service and

Pro Bono

In addition to this education series, Mr. Hoffenberg gives of his time to benefit the community and contribute to the quality justice in the State of California. For many years, he served as a volunteer pro tem in the Municipal Court in traffic, landlord-tenant, small claims and short cause matters. Currently, Mr. Hoffenberg serves as a volunteer arbitrator for the Dispute Resolution Service in attorney-client fee disputes and as a quasi-volunteer mediator in the Court of Appeals.