News & Analysis as of

Means-Plus-Function

Interpretation of Means-Plus-Function Claim Limitations

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing claim construction issues in connection with “means-plus-function” limitations, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to uphold a non-infringement verdict based on a...more

Federal Circuit Upholds IPR Decision of Unpatentability in Skky v. MindGeek

by Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit upheld an IPR final written decision by the PTAB holding that MindGeek’s claims were unpatentable in Skky, Inc. v. MindGeek, S.A.R.L., No. 2016-2018 (Fed. Cir. June 7, 2017). ...more

“Means” Does Not Always Mean “Means Plus Function”

In Skky, Inc. v. Mindgeek, S.A.R.L. [2016-2018] (June 7, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB decision in IPR 2014-01236 that all of the challenged claims in U.S. Patent 7,548,875 were invalid for obviousness....more

Summaries of All Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases Decided Since Jun. 1, 2016

This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. Please see full publication below for more information....more

Boilerplate Language Saves “Controller” From Being Deemed Functional Language

In a recent decision from the District of Delaware, the Court held that the term “controller” did not invoke pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112(6). The specific claim element recited...more

PTAB Invokes 35 U.S.C. § 112(6) To Construe Patent Claim Term During IPR Proceeding

In a recent decision (IPR2016-01372) to institute an Inter Partes Review (IPR), The United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) invoked pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112 paragraph 6 (now 35 U.S.C. § 112(f)) to interpret the...more

Managing Patent Portfolios and Drafting Applications To Withstand IPR Challenges

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

Since implementation of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, inter partes review (“IPR”) and other post-grant proceedings have been used successfully to challenge and invalidate thousands of patent claims. Over 2,000 IPR...more

Gerundtology

§112(f) allows a patent applicant to claim an element by the function it performs. Functionally claimed elements using §112(f), however, are limited to what is disclosed in the specification and equivalents. The classic...more

Structural Element Does Not Make Method Claims Indefinite

In Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sprint Communication Company LP, [2016-1013] (September 23, 2016), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s determination that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,452,932;...more

Federal Circuit Review | August 2016

by Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Holds That Using A Contract Manufacturer Does Not Trigger An On-Sale Bar - In The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, -1504, the Federal Circuit, en banc, held that the patentee’s deal...more

Indefiniteness of Means-Plus-Function Claims

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing both the circumstances that lead to a claim limitation invoking a means-plus-function construction and indefiniteness issues for means-plus-function claims, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed...more

Packing Your Patent Application for Europe: Avoiding Problems Under European Patent Law

by Hodgson Russ LLP on

Planning an extended European vacation for your patent application? A lengthy stay in Munich with possible outings to The Hague, Berlin, Vienna, or Brussels? While your patent application won’t be strolling through the...more

Forecast Unfavorable for Inventory Software Patent

Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank shifted the contours of patent-eligible subject matter, district courts have wielded the two-part test set forth in that decision to dispatch scores of...more

Judge Rakoff Holds a 3-D “Magic Trick” Implemented With Software Is Not Equivalent to One Implemented With Hardware

On April 24, 2016, District Judge Jed S. Rakoff (S.D.N.Y.) ruled that defendants Nintendo Co., Ltd. and Nintendo of America, Inc.’s (collectively, “Nintendo”)’s 3DS pocket gaming console does not infringe Tomita Technologies...more

Functional Claim Language Does Not Render Apparatus Claim Indefinite For Including Both Method And Apparatus

Patent applications involving electrical and/or computer related inventions often involve functional claim language. For example, software may be claimed in terms of its function. One or more components of an electrical...more

Means-Plus-Function Claim Interpretation in Patent Claims – Remember the Alamo!

by Miles & Stockbridge P.C. on

The Battle of the Alamo occurred between February 23 and March 6, 1836. Here, 180 years later, during the anniversary of the Alamo, I found myself in the Eastern District of Texas at a Markman hearing – and it reminded me of...more

Driessen v. Sony Music Entertainment (Fed. Cir. 2016)

On February 10, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a case captioned Driessen v. Sony Music Entertainment, Best Buy Stores, Fye, & Target Corp. addressing issues related to means-plus-function claims...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - January 2016

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Highlights of 2015 and What to Watch in 2016 in The United States - Commil USA, llC v. CiSCo SyStemS, inC. (Supreme Court, may 26, 2015). In May, the Supreme Court held that a good faith belief that an asserted patent...more

Algorithm Optional? A Guide to Computers as Structure in Means-Plus-Function Claiming

by Orrick - NorCal IP Group on

Summary Judgment Order, Fortinet, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., et al., Case No. 13-cv-05831-EMC (Judge Edward Chen) - Means-plus-function claim elements are less common than in the past, due to stricter rules about their scope...more

Form Vs. Substance In Means-Plus-Function Analysis

by WilmerHale on

Section 112(f) of the patent statute allows a patentee to define a structural claim element in terms of its function alone, i.e., “as a means ... for performing a specified function without the recital of structure ... in...more

“Mechanism” Claim Term Found to Be an Indefinite Means-Plus-Function Element - Media Rights Techs. v. Capital One Financial Corp.

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether a claim term was a means-plus-function term under the pre-America Invents Act (AIA) 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit construed the disputed term as a...more

Functional Language Made Claims Indefinite

In Media Rights Technologies, Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corporation, [2014-1218] (September 4, 2015), the Federal Circuit affirmed judgment on the pleadings that all of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,316,033 were invalid...more

Media Rights Technologies, Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2015) - Broad Claim Terms and Inadequate Support in...

In Media Rights Technologies, Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corp. (September 4, 2015), the Federal Circuit first transformed a broadly described element in a claim into a means-plus-function claim term, and then found the...more

PTAB Addresses Means-Plus-Function Claim in a Post-Williamson World

Like every en banc Federal Circuit decision, the Court’s decision in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, No. 2013-1130 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2015) (en banc) made big headlines. It is, therefore, worth reviewing one of the first...more

No En Banc Review of Panel Decision Vacating a Civil Contempt Remedye - Plus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc.

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of contempt for violation of a non-final injunction, a divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to rehear en banc a panel decision that vacated a civil contempt holding for violation...more

51 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.