Just a snippet of this case out of Iowa: Engineered Products v. Donaldson Co. (N.D. Iowa 2004)
Donaldson was found liable for infringement of Engineered Product's patent on a mechanical air filter. (U.S. Patent No. 4,445,456). In a post trial argument, Donaldson's attorneys argued that the patent law videotape prepared by the Federal Judicial Center, which was intended to provide potential jurors with an introduction to patent law should not have been shown during jury selection. The judge was not happy with this argument:
While the undersigned has been restrained in his ten years as a federal district court judge about characterizing any party’s argument as “frivolous,” Donaldson’s argument concerning use of the videotape is one of the rare ones for which the undersigned can find no other characterization. Zealous representation at times requires judicious determination of which arguments are worth advancing or preserving, and which are not, or the credibility of even meritorious arguments may be called into question by the assertion of meritless ones.
Donaldson announced that it intends to "vigorously challenge the judgment and will appeal the decision to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals." The appeal will likely be on other grounds. The patent expired in 2001, but EPC was suing for past damages.
Recent Comments