In granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on defendant's inequitable conduct counterclaim, the court rejected defendant's argument that plaintiff misled the PTO in certain arguments favoring patentability over the prior art. "The Federal Circuit recently stated that 'our precedent has made clear that an applicant is free to advocate its interpretation of its claims and the teachings of prior art' . . . The court pointed out that since the prior art reference had been 'submitted for the patent examiner to examine herself, she was free to accept or reject the patentee’s arguments distinguishing its invention from the prior art.'"
K-TEC v. Vita-Mix, 2-06-cv-00108 (UTD February 2, 2010, Order) (Campbell, J.)