Department of Social & Health Services v. Turner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[wjhether conduct in the prosecution of a patent is sufficient to strip a patentee of its immunity from the anti trust laws” implicates the Federal Circuit’s “exclusive jurisdiction” and, accordingly, should be decided under the law of that circuit
• stating that Walker Process provides 3 the legal grounds on which a patentee may be “stripped of its immunity from the antitrust 4 laws.”
• following Walker Process and holding that a patentholder may -8- be subject to federal antitrust liability if the plaintiff proves that the patentholder obtained its patent through “knowing and willful fraud”
• “[A] distinction must be maintained between-patents procured by ‘deliberate fraud’ and those rendered invalid or unenforceable for other reasons.”
• “[A] distinction must be maintained between patents procured by ‘deliberate fraud’ and those rendered invalid or unenforceable for other reasons.”
• “Inequitable conduct is thus an equitable defense in a patent infringement action and serves as a shield . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).