Legal Opinion
Hyatt v. Matal
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 1, 2018No. Civil Action No. 2009-1872Published
1Opinion of the Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) GILBERT P. HYATT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 05-2310 (RCL) ) Civil Action No. 09-1864 (RCL) Vv. ) Civil Action No. 09-1869 (RCL) ) Civil Action No. 09-1872 (RCL) ANDREI IANCU, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT, ' AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. BACKGROUND Before the Court is the defendant’s asserted affirmative defense of prosecution laches in the four above-captioned cases. Prosecution laches is an equitable doctrine that can hold patents unenforceable when an applicant engages in unnecessary and unexplained…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Complaint v. Scimed Life Systems, Inc., and Robert L. Hess, Cross-Complainant/appellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Kappos v. HyattSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Woodbridge v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- In Re Stephen B. Bogese IICourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.