美國專利不正行為之研究─以Therasense案為中心

Abstract

不正行為是法院所建立的原則，從最高法院三部曲開始，進而從不潔之手原則分離出來，成為一獨立理論。不正行為主要是用來懲罰專利權人在進行專利申請時，有意圖地不揭露重要資訊至PTO，而取得專利的行為。 在不正行為發展的過程中，下級法院曾發展出了許多用來判斷不正行為構成要件的各種理論，而於2011年5月26日，美國聯邦巡迴上訴法院在Therasense v. Becton一案做出了聯席判決的結果，統一了不正行為各構成要件的判斷方式，其大幅度限縮了不正行為的各個成立要件。本研究進行了Therasense案前後的判決與訴狀審查的比較，發現Therasense案確實降低了不正行為勝訴的比率；此外，雖然Therasense案僅針對判決進行討論，但卻也同時大幅度地降低了訴狀階段提出不正行為抗辯的成功率。

Inequitable conduct is a unique judicially created doctrine, whose birth can be traced back to a trio of Supreme Court cases. Now it becomes an independent doctrine, separated from the original unclean hand doctrine. In general, inequitable conduct is used to punish those who intentionally withhold material information without submitting the material information to PTO in order to deceive the PTO to obtain a patent.

In the evolution of the inequitable conduct, lower circuits have provided multiple standards to prove the elements of inequitable conduct. However, in 26th May, 2011, CAFC made a decision in Therasense v. Becton (en banc), which unify and tighten the standards of the elements of inequitable conduct.

This research analyzed post-Therasense cases and pre-Therasense cases in district courts, and finds out that the possibility of proving inequitable conduct is lower than that before Therasense, and the possibility of alleging inequitable conduct is much lower than that before Therasense even Therasense only focused on the standards of elements in the final judgment stages instead of pleading stage.