Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
882 F.2d 1556 (1989)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Hewlett-Packard (HP) (plaintiff) filed a declaratory judgment action alleging that the ‘684 reissue patent, assigned to Bausch & Lomb (B&L) (defendant), was invalid and that HP did not infringe. B&L obtained the rights to the ‘950 patent in a defensive maneuver against HP, as the two companies were competitors in the mathematical device market, specifically in X-Y Plotters. Fearing that the ‘950 patent was too broad, B&L sought reissue with several new narrower claims, these new claims drawn to the HP market X-Y Plotter product. In order to obtain a reissue, B&L was forced to file affidavits regarding the scope of the ‘950 claims, specifically alleging that B&L had not claimed the full breadth of protection available to it. The ‘950 patent reissued as the ‘684 patent, over the reexamination arguments of HP. In light of B&L’s threats of infringement against HP, the declaratory judgment action was filed, where the District Court held that the new reissued claims were invalid.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nies, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
