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 →
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 →
Application of doctrine of equivalents to range limitation in claim does not vitiate the limitation In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's claim construction, but reversed its rulings regarding the sufficiency of notice of infringement and the applicability of the doctrine of equivalents. Regarding sufficiency of notice under 35 U.S.C. 287(a), the court held that while the patentee did not mark its products, its notice of […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit issues short opinion on claim construction, even shorter mention of claim vitiation The Federal Circuit today issued a brief, five-page opinion regarding claim construction and infringement issues relating to a patent on insulated shipping containers. The court affirmed the lower court's claim construction and, as a result, affirmed the summary judgment of noninfringement. The court also dispensed with the doctrine of equivalents in a single sentence, making […] Continue Reading →
“Critical” ratio in claim does not get the benefit of the doctrine of equivalents Today’s lesson from the Federal Circuit: be careful not to make a claim limitation “critical,” or you may lose the benefit of the doctrine of equivalents for that element. The court found that the claimed weight ratio of two drugs was critical in part because other claims recited a range of ratios, but the claim […] Continue Reading →
Showing a strong Spine, the Federal Circuit addresses the Doctrine of Equivalents In DuPuy Spin, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment of non-infringement on Medtronics Vertex? model with regards to U.S. Patent No. 5,207,678 (the ‘678 patent). Additionally, the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court’s judgment of non-infringement for Medtronics bottom-loaded screw device […] Continue Reading →