[evilC]

If the patent was legally granted (even if it was "bad") then I can see a judge wanting to enforce it. I am not sure that it means for sure that the judge thought it a worthy patent (as you pointed out that is the job of the USPTO).

[LurkingSince'98]

the judges in these cases may or may not be familiar with the law but if an inventor has a patent and shows a judge what he teaches is novel and unobvious to someone skilled in the art then he wins, that is the point shelling out the money and spending several years of your life to get a patent. If the inventor prevails in court, ie his lawyers arguments and proofs are superior - then he wins. This has NOTHING to do with whether someone is worthy or not of a patent - you think of it first, you document it, it is a patentable matter and novel - you get a patent.

Any patent is only as good as it is adjudicated to be anyway, and this Companies patent is $5 mil good.

Lurking'