Cellular Communications Equipment LLC v. HTC Corporation et al, 6-16-cv-00475 (TXED July 5, 2018, Order) (Mitchell, MJ)
Monday, July 9, 2018
Identification of Putative Inventor Unnecessary For Improper Inventorship Defense to Survive Summary Judgment
The court denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment that its wireless communication patent was not invalid for improper inventorship on the grounds that defendant could not identify a purported inventor. "Plaintiff has failed to cite case law that explicitly requires the identification of a putative inventor to establish a genuine issue of material fact with respect to improper inventorship. At best, Plaintiff relies on cases that implicitly require the identification of a putative inventor when considering the merits of an improper inventorship defense. . . . Defendant points to [a third party working group member's] e-mail summary discussing the BSR format selection criteria and [defendant's] expert testimony that the e-mail summary contains the subject matter of the [patent-in-suit]. This calls into question whether [the named inventor] was the sole inventor of the subject matter of the claimed invention."