| |
| | FINA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. John Ewen |
 | | Ewen disputed Fina’s construction of the settlement agreement and argued that, in any event, the district court was without authority to issue the order Fina was seeking. |
 | | Fina points out that, under § 255, a minor clerical error, which was made by the patent applicant in good faith and which does not constitute new matter or require reexamination, may be corrected through a certificate of correction. |
 | | According to Fina, because the order of inventors would not affect the scope or meaning of the patents at issue, and because Fina acted in good faith when it initially declared Dr. Ewen to be the first inventor, the order of inventors may be changed pursuant to either § 255 or § 256. |
| www.ll.georgetown.edu /Federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-1578.html (1846 words) |
|