If a person believes that he/she should have been named as an inventor on an issued patent, what does it take to get a court to correct inventorship? My partner Josh Slavitt recently published an article addressing this question. Josh’s article summarizes last week’s decision from the Federal Circuit in Tavory v. NTP, Inc., where the Court stated that the alleged inventor’s contribution must be more than ordinary skill in the art. According to the court, that the alleged inventor must not have simply reduced the ideas of others to practice. Also, the inventor’s own statements are not, by themselves, sufficient to establish inventorship. Instead, correction of inventorship requires corrobrating evidence, such as contemporaneous documents or independent testimony.
Although the Court labeled its opinion as non-precedential, the opinion presents a useful summary of prior caselaw on the subject. For the full text of Josh’s article describing the case, click here.