<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>IPWatchdog.com &#124; Patents &#38; Patent Law &#187; bon tool</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipwatchdog.com/tag/bon-tool/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com</link>
	<description>Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications &#38; Patent Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 16:49:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>No $5.4 Trillion Bounty for False Patent Marking Bounty Hunter</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/06/15/no-bounty-for-false-marking/id=11139/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/06/15/no-bounty-for-false-marking/id=11139/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Guttag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Eric Guttag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bon tool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bounty hunter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clontech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cup lid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false marking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judge gajarsa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Lourie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judge rader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent bounty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent marking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pequignot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qui tam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solo cup]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=11139</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Perquignot v. Solo Cup Co., the stakes were truly mind-boggling:  about $10.8 trillion in total.  Approximately $5.4 trillion of that bounty would be the federal government’s share which the Federal Circuit characterized as “sufficient to pay back 42% of the country’s total national debt.”  High stakes indeed!  But unfortunately for the bounty hunter (Pequignot) in Perquignot, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court grant of summary judgment that there was no “deceptive intent” on the part of the patentee (Solo Cup), thus no approximately $5.4 trillion bounty was owed.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/10/28/decision-to-deceive-mismarking-products-with-bogus-patent-numbers-can-cost-you/id=6930/' rel='bookmark' title='Decision to Deceive Mismarking Products with Bogus Patent Numbers Can Cost You'>Decision to Deceive Mismarking Products with Bogus Patent Numbers Can Cost You</a><small>False marking is a statute in the Patent Act that imposes civil liability for intentionally marking a product as patented when it isn’t. We’ve all come across a product marked with the phrase, “This product is covered by U.S. Patent No. (fill in the blank).” Such marking puts the world on notice that the patent [...]...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/02/25/a-fanciful-false-marking-fiction-by-a-cottage-industrialist/id=9299/' rel='bookmark' title='A Fanciful False Marking Fiction By a Cottage Industrialist'>A Fanciful False Marking Fiction By a Cottage Industrialist</a><small>The day starts out quiet enough. I wake up and scoop my contacts out of the Clear Care® contact lens solution they’re swimming in. Blinking rapidly to settle my contacts, I focus on some tiny numbers printed on the contact solution box. Patent numbers. I’ve been using the solution for years and wonder how old the patents must be. I do a quick Google search and discover that the patents have expired. Strange that expired patents would be printed on the box... My 3 year old interrupts my thoughts as she walks up to me still rubbing her eyes, complaining...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/03/15/federal-circuit-grants-writ-of-mandamus-in-false-marking-case/id=15776/' rel='bookmark' title='Federal Circuit Grants Writ of Mandamus in False Marking Case'>Federal Circuit Grants Writ of Mandamus in False Marking Case</a><small>Seeking a writ of mandamus seems as if it is becoming a more popular avenue to pursue than it once might have been. A writ of mandamus essentially seeks an order from a higher court to direct a lower court to follow the law. They are extraordinary remedies because they come well before the case is over, which means that an ordinary appeal cannot be taken at that point; appeals are only typically allowed for final adjudications. Notwithstanding the extraordinary nature of a mandamus request, earlier today the Federal Circuit issued a writ of mandamus requiring a district court to...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/06/15/no-bounty-for-false-marking/id=11139/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
