Following a jury trial, the court determined that plaintiff's patents were not unenforceable for inequitable conduct under Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, No. 2008-1511, at 18 (Fed. Cir. May 25, 2011), because defendants failed to establish intent to deceive. "[The first named inventor of the patents-in-suit] consistently testified in deposition and at trial that he believed there was nothing like his invention prior to September 1998 and that he also believed that no one had even recognized the problem that his invention was designed to solve. . . . [The inventor] was at no time inconsistent regarding the sincerity of his belief that there was no material prior art -- i.e., that he had uncovered a breakthrough invention. Considering [the inventor's] testimony in light of the evidence as a whole, the court concludes that specific intent to deceive is not the single most reasonable inference that must be drawn from the evidence."
Ameranth, Inc. v. Menusoft Systems Corporation, et. al., 2-07-cv-00271 (TXED May 26, 2011, Order) (Everingham, M.J.)