In Intellect Wireless, Inc. v. HTC Corp., the court affirmed the district court's conclusion of inequitable conduct. Boiled down, the applicant filed a Rule 131 affidavit stating that it had actually reduced the invention to practice when, in fact, it had not. In a later affidavit, references to "actual reduction to practice" were removed, but the affidavit still contained references to a prototype--that had never been made, among other things. The court held that the affidavits were material, relying upon Therasense's statement that false affidavits were so by their nature. It held there was intent to deceive based upon the first affidavit alone, confirmed by the filing of the second without clearing matters up coupled with similar misconduct in other related cases.
The case does not appear to break new ground, but it does reinforce the fact that inequitable conduct is not a dead letter.