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) There is a claim under the Sherman Act for enforcement of a patent procured by intentional fraud. (2) The claimant must establish (a) that the patentee knowingly and willfully misrepresented facts to the Patent Office and good faith would furnish a complete defense; (b) exclusionary power (a lessening or destruction of competion) by the patent in the relevant market for the product involved - i.e., there is no per se illegality and (c) damages.

WALKER PROCESS v. FOOD MACHINERY, 382 U.S. 172 (December 6, 1965)

 

FACTS: FM sued WP for patent infringement. WP counterclaimed for violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. WP alleged that FM fraudulently procured its patent with false testimony to the PTO of the date of first use and that WP lost business through the threat by FM of patent suit and suit.

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.