Abstract: On May 25, 2011, in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit fundamentally restructured the patent law doctrine of inequitable conduct. The court did so by holding that both intent and materiality are required for successfully claiming the defense, and that materiality must be proven by a but-for test, thereby limiting the scope of conduct covered by the doctrine. Although in making this change the court may have helped to curb the over usage of inequitable conduct, it did so by contradicting Supreme Court precedent. Thus, this Comment argues that the Therasense court overstepped its bounds and, in its attempt to limit the doctrine, may have unduly narrowed this equitable defense.
BCLR Releases Vol. LIV No. 2
Boston College Law Review is pleased to announce the publication of our March 2013 issue. • Jeremy Waldron, Separation of [...]
BCLR Elects New Board of Editors
On March 22, 2013, the membership of the Boston College Law Review elected a new Board of Editors for the [...]
BCLR Editors Win Student Writing Competitions
Two members of the Boston College Law Review‘s Executive Board, Laura Kaplan and Michael Palmisciano, recently won national writing competitions [...]