Fmc Corporation v. The Manitowoc Company, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “prior art or information was not material ... because it is less pertinent than or merely cumulative with prior art or information cited to or by the PTO”
• stating that proof of materiality “may be rebutted by a showing that: (a
• stating that party cannot intentionally avoid discovering materiality
• ‘“Inequitable conduct’ is not, or should not be, a magic incantation to be asserted against every patentee.”
• “Thus, a balancing of overlapping considerations is involved in determining, in view of all the circumstances, the presence or absence of inequitable conduct.”
• inequitable, conduct requires that knowledge chargeable to the patentee of the reference’s materiality and intent to mislead the PTO

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).