This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case. In it, the court explains why it reverses a district court’s judgment that someone should be added as a joint inventor. The court also released a summary affirmance in another case. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the summary affirmance.

HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp. (Precedential)

Hormel Foods Corporation (“Hormel”) appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware holding that David Howard should be added as a joint inventor on its U.S. Patent 9,980,498 (the “’498 patent”) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256. See HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp., No. 21-cv-546 (D. Del. Apr. 4, 2022), Dkt. 53 (“Final Judgment”) at J.A. 1–2, Dkt. 61 (“Trial Tr. III”) at J.A. 3–13, 831–1045, Dkt. 63 (“Trial Tr. V”) at J.A. 14–42, 1188–1294. For the reasons provided below, we reverse.

Rule 36 Judgment