Filewrapper

Intrinsic evidence supported pre-Phillips claim construction; finding of noninfringement affirmed

In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of noninfringement. The only disputed issue was one of claim construction. Although the district court issued its claim construction ruling before the Federal Circuit's Phillips decision and relied exclusively on a definition from a technical dictionary for its construction of the relevant term, […]

Continue Reading →

Claim construction and noninfringement affirmed on one patent, vacated on another

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court's grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of one patent and affirmed summary judgment of noninfringement of another. The determinations turned on the construction of one claim element in each patent.In the first patent, the court held that there was sufficient disclosure in the […]

Continue Reading →

Claim term construed by construing different term in specification deleted from claim

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part a district court's summary judgment of noninfringement based on a revised claim construction of two claim terms. The court, in somewhat of a departure from its typical practice, also construed one additional term that appeared likely to be relevant on remand, but which did […]

Continue Reading →

Hybrid vehicle patent not infringed; invalidity issues need not be reached on appeal from ITC

In an appeal from the International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission's determination of noninfringement of a patent. The court, however, did not consider the ITC's finding of nonenablement on appeal. While in the context of a district court case a counterclaim for invalidity is not mooted by a finding of noninfringement, the […]

Continue Reading →

District court’s claim construction too narrow, but noninfringement finding affirmed anyway

In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit held that a district court construed a claim limitation too narrowly. However, even under the broader construction, summary judgment was still appropriate, because there was no genuine issue of fact that the accused method still did not practice that element, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. […]

Continue Reading →

Two district courts, one correct claim construction; $103 million damage award vacated

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a jury verdict of willful infringement and a total award of over $100 million based on a modified claim construction. The court also reversed the finding that one asserted claim was not anticipated, and remanded the case for a redetermination of infringement and whether the remaining claims […]

Continue Reading →

Preamble not limiting when duplicative of claim limitations and not added to overcome rejection

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit held that a district court erred in its construction of several claim terms in a patent, and as a result, vacated the district court's summary judgment of noninfringement and no invalidity. The court affirmed the district court's decisions regarding several other issues, including laches, inequitable conduct, and inventorship. […]

Continue Reading →

If ordinary meaning of claim term does not resolve disputed construction, court must construe term

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a jury's finding of willful infringement case back to a district court, based on errors in claim construction and application of the doctrine of equivalents. The district court's original Markman hearing determined that no construction was necessary for a particular claim term, "only if," […]

Continue Reading →

Same claim term can be interpreted differently in the same claim if specification warrants

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit decided a case addressing the limitations of what constitutes "insolubly ambiguous" claim terms in order to amount to indefiniteness. The district court held the asserted claims invalid because they impermissibly mixed two statutory classes of subject matter, as well as because they required construing the same term […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit: And can mean or, if it makes the claim make sense

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's permanent injunction against a defendant to prevent infringement of a patent. The district court held the patent not invalid and infringed, based in part on a claim construction that construed the word "and" to mean "or." Specifically, based on the specification and other […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up