Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V.

The only issue decided by the panel majority is the district court’s ruling of inequitable conduct, during patent prosecution.1 I respectfully dissent, for my colleagues apply incorrect law and add confusion to precedent.

To establish “inequitable conduct” in patent prosecution, both materiality and deceptive intent must be proved

“Inequitable conduct” arises when material references were intentionally withheld by the patent applicant in order to deceive or mislead the examiner into granting the patent. Both materiality and intent must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Therasense,…