nunia 神经

2019年2月23日星期六

Fwd: Latest Case: CODA Development SRO v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (Intellectual Property)

#Justia

US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
February 23, 2019

CODA Development SRO v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Intellectual Property, Patents

Click here to remove Verdict from subsequent Justia newsletter(s).

New on Verdict

Legal Analysis and Commentary

Compare and Contrast: The Vatican's Gathering of Bishops in Rome with the Epstein Court on Justice for Child Sex Abuse Victims

MARCI A. HAMILTON

Marci A. Hamliton—professor and resident senior fellow in the Program for Research on Religion at the University of Pennsylvania and founder, CEO, and Academic Director of CHILD USA—describes the similarities and differences between the Vatican's gathering of bishops to address clergy sex abuse scandals and the federal judge's ruling in the case of Jeffrey Epstein over sex trafficking scandals. Hamilton points out that decision in the Epstein case is a victory for child sex abuse victims, while the approach of the Catholic Church is already misguided.

Read More

US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Opinions

CODA Development SRO v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Docket: 18-1028

Opinion Date: February 22, 2019

Judge: Sharon Prost

Areas of Law: Intellectual Property, Patents

CODA's CEO, Hrabal, invented self-inflating tire (SIT) technology. In 2008, GM representatives approached CODA, wanting to involve Goodyear in commercializing the technology. The parties executed a nondisclosure agreement, then met in 2009. Goodyear's representatives included Benedict. At Goodyear's request, CODA shared confidential information concerning the SIT. Goodyear representatives expressed skepticism about its viability. The parties agreed to continue discussions. Benedict requested to review an updated technical presentation, the latest testing methods, and performance results. At a second meeting, CODA allowed Goodyear to examine a functional prototype of the technology. Benedict requested that his team have time alone with the prototype, during which he photographed it without permission. Months then passed without any communication. In December 2009, a Goodyear employee on Benedict's team independently inquired about the status of CODA's SIT in preparation for an internal Goodyear meeting. Unbeknownst to CODA, Goodyear applied for a patent entitled "Self-Inflating Tire Assembly." The 586 patent issued in 2011, naming Benedict and Losey as the inventors. CODA later received an unsolicited email from the ex-Goodyear employee with whom it corresponded in December 2009, stating, "I am retired now .. and see ... that they have copied your SIT." The Federal Circuit vacated the dismissal of CODA's complaint, seeking correction of inventorship, 35 U.S.C. 256. The district court erred in considering outside evidence about an article, by Hrabal, concerning the technology and in concluding that the complaint was time-barred.CODA's claims allow the reasonable inference that Hrabal conceived the invention and that Benedict and Losey did not.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

About Justia Opinion Summaries

Justia Daily Opinion Summaries is a free service, with 68 different newsletters, covering every federal appellate court and the highest courts of all US states.

Justia also provides weekly practice area newsletters in 63 different practice areas.

All daily and weekly Justia newsletters are free. Subscribe or modify your newsletter subscription preferences at daily.justia.com.

You may freely redistribute this email in whole.