Patent (Had Better Be) Pending

Monday, March 08, 2010

"In other words, it is a violation of 35 U.S.C. § 292 to intentionally mark an item in commerce with a patent number that has expired or that does not protect the item. ... In Forest Group, Inc. v. Bon Tool Co., the Federal Circuit ruled that the $500 maximum penalty attaches to each individual article that is falsely marked..."
FDA Law Blog, 3/7/10

Yikes. I don't have any special insight or expertise in this situation, but this struck me as a pretty important link to pass along. If you mark a device "patent pending" it appears to be pretty important that you actually file a patent application. The days of using the term as an empty threat may be ending.

 

Tags: Advertising & Promotion, Best Practices, FDA

Other Blog Authors

Dylan Reinhardt
Dave Kern
Steve Gutman
Jo-Ann Gonzales

Recent Blog Posts

The Staple That Changed an Industry LDT regulation and the perils of challenging Eminem to a rap battle
FDA Releases the Kraken Whichever way this breaks, it's long past time to have this conversation in a meaningful way
Illumina Acquires Myraqa Acquisition Strengthens Illumina’s Clinical Readiness
The Spirit of GLP A Best Practice for IVDs
Process Performance Qualification (PPQ) Lots So, how many lots are required?
The Case for Risk-based Monitoring Better the devil you know...
Form Follows Function OIR Reorganizes to Meet the Advancing Wave of Molecular Diagnostics
CDRH Unveils New PMA Guidance Documents Attention shoppers, it's two-for-one day!