False Marking Constitutionality Debate To Rage On

Law360, New York (February 24, 2011, 9:12 PM EST) -- An Ohio district court's finding that the qui tam provision of the false marking statute is unconstitutional may give a boost to companies targeted in suits over allegedly expired patents, but a widespread and lasting impact on the recent rash of case filings is unlikely to occur until the Federal Circuit inevitably weighs in on the issue, attorneys say.

Judge Dan A. Polster of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio ruled Wednesday that the qui tam provision of 34 U.S.C. Section 292,...
To view the full article, register now.