Show: 1 day 1 week 1 month All
Custom (decided):
Coverage since November 3, 1994

Federal Circuit

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

CCS Fitness v. Brunswick Corp. — Claim Term “Member” Carries Ordinary Meaning; Not Limited to Single-Component Structure Shown in Patent Drawings

The Federal Circuit reversed a narrow claim construction, holding that the claim term “reciprocating member” in an exercise equipment patent should be given its ordinary meaning encompassing multi-component and curved structures, not limited to the single straight bar depicted in the spe

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Johnson & Johnston Associates v. R.E. Service Co. — En Banc Federal Circuit Holds Disclosed-But-Unclaimed Subject Matter Is Dedicated to the Public

In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit held that subject matter disclosed in a patent specification but not claimed is dedicated to the public and cannot be recaptured through the doctrine of equivalents — patentees who fail to claim a disclosed alternative cannot later assert it as equivalent

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson Medical — Prosecution Laches Can Bar Enforcement of Submarine Patents Delayed Decades

The Federal Circuit held that the equitable doctrine of prosecution laches can bar enforcement of patent claims that issued after an unreasonable and unexplained multi-decade delay in patent prosecution — a landmark ruling against Jerome Lemelson’s famous ‘submarine patent’ strateg

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Rexnord Corp. v. Laitram Corp. — Specifications Describe Preferred Embodiments and Cannot Limit Claims to Those Embodiments Absent Clear Disclaimer

The Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment of non-infringement in a modular conveyor belt patent case, holding that the district court improperly limited the claim term ‘portion’ to a narrow construction requiring physical separation, when the plain meaning of ‘portion’

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Bio-Technology General Corp. v. Genentech, Inc. — Patent on Recombinant Human Growth Hormone Is Enabled Even Though Process Produces Predominantly Met-hGH Rather Than Mature hGH

The Federal Circuit reversed a judgment of invalidity for lack of enablement, holding that a patent on a recombinant method for producing human growth hormone (hGH) was adequately enabled even though the process predominantly produced met-hGH (containing an extra methionine residue) rather than matu

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Toro Co. v. White Consolidated Industries — Separating a Unitary Claim Structure into Two Pieces May Infringe Under Doctrine of Equivalents

The Federal Circuit vacated summary judgment and remanded for trial, holding that splitting a claimed unitary structure into two separate components may constitute infringement under the doctrine of equivalents even when the literal claim requirement for a single integrated piece is not met.

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Exxon Research & Engineering Co. v. United States — Close Questions of Claim Construction Do Not Automatically Render Claims Indefinite

The Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment of invalidity for indefiniteness, reaffirming that claims are sufficiently definite under § 112 if a person skilled in the art would understand the bounds of the claim when read in light of the specification — close questions of claim construction do n

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Gart v. Logitech, Inc. — Preferred Embodiment’s Specific Structure Cannot Limit Broader Claim Language; Patent Notice Letters Must Identify Specific Products

The Federal Circuit vacated summary judgment of non-infringement, holding that the district court improperly imported a structural limitation (a “ledge”) from the patent drawings into a broader claim term (“angular medial surface”), and clarified when a patentee’s pre-s

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. — En Banc Federal Circuit Creates Complete Bar to Doctrine of Equivalents After Claim Amendment

The Federal Circuit sitting en banc adopted a sweeping complete-bar rule: any narrowing amendment made during prosecution to comply with the Patent Act creates an absolute estoppel that bars all claims of equivalence for the amended element — a rule later rejected by the Supreme Court in 2002.

Federal Circuit
Uncategorized

Watts v. XL Systems — Claim Limitation Lacking the Word “Means” Carries Presumption Against Means-Plus-Function Treatment

The Federal Circuit held that a claim limitation that does not use the word “means” carries a strong presumption against means-plus-function treatment under § 112(6), and that even when that presumption is overcome, the limitation must still be construed in light of the specification to

Scroll to Top