Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC -
Where the word “means” is not actually recited in a patent claim, case law provides a strong presumption that the claim is not a means-plus-function claim under § 112(f). If it is...more
On April 4, 2014, Judge Thrash issued an opinion and order construing a number of claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,725,564 ("the '564 patent"), 5,987,359 ("the '359 patent"), 6,104,958 ("the '958 patent"), and 7,280,873 ("the...more
In this article:
- Patentability, Validity, and Procurement of Patents
- Interpretation and Infringement of Patents
- Enforcement of Patents
- Patents at the U.S. Supreme Court
The Federal Circuit, in Function Media v. Google, has determined that use of “means” language in a claim can lead to indefiniteness.
Functional Media sued Google for infringement of three patents regarding advertising...more
Means-plus-function language in patent claims is interpreted very differently in Australia compared to the US. This can lead to vastly different findings with regards to validity and/or infringement.
Back to Top