Kingsdown Medical Consultants, Ltd. And E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Hollister Incorporated

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the evidence “must be sufficient to require a finding of deceitful intent in the light of all the circumstances”
• explaining that it is not “in any manner improper to amend or insert claims intended to cover a competitor’s product the applicant’s attorney has learned about during the prosecution of a patent application”
• finding the proffered witness qualified as an expert in mechanical engineering, but that his methodology, in analyzing a particular tire failure, was not reliable
• holding even gross negligence insufficient to prove intent to deceive
• intent to deceive the examiner into granting the patent is a separate and essential element of inequitable conduct in the PTO
• conduct must be “sufficient to require a finding of deceitful intent in light of all the circumstances”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).