How Direct Purchasers Fit Into Walker Process Landscape

This article discusses the background of the Federal Circuit’s holding in Ritz Camera and how direct-purchaser litigation may fit into the Walker Process landscape.

January 16, 2013

Law360, New York (January 16, 2013, 12:06 PM ET) -- More than 45 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Walker Process Equipment Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp.,[1] that a patent holder who acquires a patent through intentional fraud can be held liable under the antitrust laws. Since that landmark ruling, competitors in patent cases have frequently asserted Walker Process claims, seeking an affirmative recovery for harm caused by patents acquired through fraud and/or inequitable conduct before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

All Content © 2003-2013, Portfolio Media, Inc.

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.

Disclaimer

Christopher K. Larus

Partner

Chair, National IP and Technology Litigation Group

Related Publications

December 8, 2022
Lessons From MMAS Research About Dispositive Pitfalls in Copyright Litigation
David Martinez, Austin Miller - Los Angeles & San Francisco Daily Journal
November 22, 2022
November 19, 2022
How to Use the USPTO Patent Public Search Tool
Miles Finn, Rajin Olson, Kelson Bain, and Ian LaForge - IPWatchdog
October 2022
In No Uncertain Terms
Bryan Mechell - The Robins Kaplan Quarterly
September 13, 2022
Patent Value: Scoring Patents Using Characteristics Of Patents In Litigation
Christopher K. Larus, Miles A. Finn, Congnan Zhan, Joseph (Yu) Chen, and Shelley Gilliss - les Nouvelles
Back to Top