InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 45
Posts 1174
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/13/2009

Re: thefamilyman post# 6273

Saturday, 10/13/2012 2:47:47 PM

Saturday, October 13, 2012 2:47:47 PM

Post# of 30990
The issue on which RJR petitioned SC was invalidity based on indefiniteness under 35 USC 112, which is a question of law not fact. The Federal Circuit's decision on that issue is now final. In a new infringement lawsuit, another company could challenge validity on other grounds, but not on the issue of indefiniteness. Since it was a question of law, there could not be any new "facts" that another company could allege that could alter the Federal Circuit's conclusion of law as to indefiniteness under 35 USC 112. So at this time, the legal status is the patents have not been shown to be invalid based on prior art and are conclusively not indefinite under 35 USC 112.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.