The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group Co. (Fed. Cir. 2015) serves as a reminder that courts may implicitly read an order into a patent’s method claim steps, even if the applicant did not intend such order. On June 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion construing several claim terms in U.S. Patent No. 7,910,340, affirming-in-part, vacating-in-part, and remanding to the district court for further proceedings. In doing so, the Federal Circuit applied an implicit order to the method claims of an industrial biotechnology patent.

The technology in Kaneka relates to processes for bio-producing oxidized coenzyme Q10 on an industrial scale. Kaneka filed its complaint against the defendants for patent infringement in district court on March 22, 2011, and then filed a complaint in the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) on June 17, 2011. The district court stayed the proceedings until final determination by the Commission, after which it construed several terms and ruled on summary judgment that the defendants did not infringe. On appeal, the Federal Circuit applied the standard of review handed-down by the Supreme Court in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (2015), reviewing the district court’s claim construction de novo except for subsidiary facts, which the Federal Circuit reviewed for “clear error.”