Pfizer, Inc. v. International Rectifier Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ELY, Circuit Judge:
Essentially upon the basis of the findings of fact and the carefully reasoned opinion of the District Judge, reported at 545 F.Supp. 486, 207 U.S.P.Q. 397 (C.D.Cal.1980), we affirm the judgment upholding the validity of Pfizer’s Patent No. 3,200,149.
A word here is proper, however, concerning the scope of the concept of materiality in determinations of whether a party’s withholding of information from the Patent Office constitutes a fraud or inequitable conduct sufficient to operate as a bar to a claim of infringement. The parties vigorously dispute the proper standard of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Frederick H. Norton v. Lawrence E. CurtissCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Monolith Portland Midwest Company, a Nevada Corporation v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Belliston v. Texaco Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Cataphote Corporation v. Desoto Chemical Coatings, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Maurice A. Garbell, Inc. v. Boeing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Clifton N. Cherry, Et Ux. v. Wesley E. SteinerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Saudi Basic Industries Corp. v. ExxonMobil Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2005
- Fast Heat Element Manufacturing Co. v. Rama Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Certified Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Avicenna Nutraceutical, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Fast Heat Element Manufacturing Co., Inc., a Corporation v. Rama Corporation, a Corporation, and Amark Industries, Inc., a Corporation, Fast Heat Element Manufacturing Co., Inc., a Corporation v. Rama Corporation, a Corporation, and Amark Industries, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.