Death pangs of the doctrine of equivalents

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Death pangs of the doctrine of equivalents

On May 22 this year, the US Supreme Court decided the most eagerly-awaited patent case in many years, Festo v SMC. The case addresses a key issue for patent holders: what protection is available under the doctrine of equivalents. But was the decision as important as many people have claimed? What effect will it have for patent applicants and litigants in the US? And what impact will it have on the US Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Circuit and district courts? MIP invited six senior IP practitioners in the US to a round table discussion, held at the Washington DC offices of Finnegan Henderson, to discuss the implications of the Festo decision, as well as other recent patent cases. James Nurton moderated the discussion

Unlock this content.

The content you are trying to view is exclusive to our subscribers.

To unlock this content:

Request Access or Login
more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Julia Bishop is director of IP at Twilio in the US
Hellberg is an IP director at Essity in Sweden
Palińska is the business & IP law lead at CD Projekt Red in Poland
Teemu Itälä is head of legal and compliance for technology standards at Nokia in Finland
Schwitulla is the head of litigation management at Nokia in Germany
David Degen is senior IP counsel at Novartis, Switzerland
Demetrio Roberto Cavicchia is an IP director at Angelini Pharma in Italy
Almeida is the IP group leader at Bosch in Brazil
Amanda Luz is brand protection manager - global at Adidas in the US
Samantak Ghosh is vice president of IP at Avere Therapeutics in the US
Gift this article