Federal court denies DuPont motion for preliminary injunction
MacDermid has raised substantial questions regarding whether DuPont’s U.S. Patent No. 6,773,859 (‘859) is invalid as being obvious in light of cited references.
DuPont has failed to show that MacDermid’s defense that the ‘859 patent is invalid for obviousness lacks substantial merit.
There are substantial questions regarding whether the ‘859 patent was an obvious combination of elements in the prior art.
DuPont has not overcome the substantial questions related to MacDermid’s obviousness defense based on the present record. Thus, DuPont has not shown that it has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.