What we now know is that the jury was flat wrong to assume that this
patent was valid.
Uh no. Whether the jury was supposed to assume
the patent valid or invalid bears no relation to what the USPTO may or may not
have decided before, during, or after the trial. The jury's job was to come to
a decision according to the jury instructions, not according to
second-guessing the USPTO. The problem with Hogan was exactly that he
reverted to second-guessing.
Anybody who wants to link the USPTO decision to
the quality of the jury work is blaming the jury for not doing what they should
not have been doing.
The sole metric for the quality of their work are the
jury instructions, and how well they have been met. Matching the USPTO decision
to the verdict (in particular where it preempts part of the jury decision) is
the job of the judge instead.
So we got no new information here regarding the
quality of jury work. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|