Navigate Up
Sign In

Thursday, June 7, 2018 Webinar


Inequitable Conduct after Regeneron

​12:30 - 2:00 pm Eastern


 Course Description:
Inequitable conduct during patent prosecution can result in a court's finding of patent unenforceability. Unlike an invalidity finding, which may leave some claims valid, inequitable conduct surrounding a single claim renders all claims of a patent unenforceable. Under Regeneron v. Merus, a finding of inequitable conduct, retrospectively imposed during litigation and without a showing of deceptive intent before the USPTO, is now a reality. Does this throw out years of precedent? Or are the results of Regeneron specific to the facts of that case? Furthermore, Regeneron has been followed by Gilead v. Merck, in which the two Merck patents in suit were held unenforceable for unclean hands, not inequitable conduct. Will this signal the resurgence of unclean hands from the famous Supreme Court trilogy of cases in the 1930’s and 1940’s?  And Gilead was followed by the Federal Circuit’s offering in Heat-on-the-Fly, concluding, in the course of a finding of inequitable conduct, intent to deceive by what was apparently a non-legal person.  This raises the question about whether non-legal persons can truly satisfy the Therasense intent standard. It should also be noted that the MPEP has recently been beefed up regarding disclosure issues relating to enforceability. Finally, how do the AIA procedures of Supplemental Examination and Derivation fit into all this?  This webinar will show patent prosecutors and litigators alike how to avoid or obtain similar outcomes, depending on the individual facts and circumstances of their clients.
Presented by: Tom Irving of Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garret & Dunner, LLP and
David Hricik of Mercer University School of Law, Macon, Georgia.​



Registration Fees Per Site:    
AIPLA Member 
General/Non-Member Rate
Single Site (1) $95 $195
2-10 Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.
$295 $350
11-20 Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.
$445 $495
21+ Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.
$595 $650
Registration includes:
  • For multiple-attendee sites, all participants must attend at the same location.
  • CLE certification/processing for applicable states.  Reference CLE Information below for complete details.  
  • Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information, accessible 24-48 hours before webinar date.

Cancellation Policy: 
To get full refund, registrant must request refund 
five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product.
AIPLA MEMBERS: Did you know AIPLA offers our Solo-Practitioner members a special registration rate of $65 for all CLE webinars?  Please contact AIPLA directly at to complete your registration or access the registration form here. 

System requirements: 
Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.  Check system compatibility here.
Accessibility for hearing impaired:
AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.



AIPLA has sought CLE accreditation* in the following states for credit(s): 
*CLE accreditations updated upon receipt.

​Alaska ​Maine
​Arkansas ​Minnesota
​Rhode Island
​South Carolina

​Florida ​Nebraska
​Utah (self-study)
​New Jersey
​Idaho ​New Mexico

​New York

​West Virginia
​North Carolina
​North Dakota
CLE Restrictions: 
ATTENTION attorneys in LouisianaOhioPennsylvania and Utah
These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit.  Multiple attendees prohibited.
ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona
Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.
ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire
New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53.  The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting NH CLE credit after the webinar.   


Disclaimer:  AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association.  The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content.  AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice.  The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors.  These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.