Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Complexities in intellectual property for individual inventors: DeVona v Zeitels

At jury trial, the inventorship issue went one way; the contract issue the other way:

The parties went to trial on the patent inventorship
claim and partnership claims. The jury found against Mr.
DeVona on patent inventorship, rejecting his theory that
he meaningfully contributed to the glottiscope design embodied by U.S. Patent No. 6,955,645.
Thus, Dr. Zeitels remains the only inventor listed on the patent. However, the
jury found in Mr. DeVona’s favor on the partnership
claims. For breach of fiduciary duty, the jury awarded
$395,907. For breach of the partnership agreement, the
jury awarded Mr. DeVona $352,007

But JNOV went against DeVona, and the CAFC affirmed.


Post a Comment

<< Home