Means-Plus-Function

News & Analysis as of

“Nonce” Words and Means-Plus-Function Analysis

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

Judge Thrash Declines to Read in Limitations From the Specification in Dysphagia Treatment Patent Dispute

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

Developments in Patent Law 2013; The D.C. Bar Year in Review

In this article: - Patentability, Validity, and Procurement of Patents - Interpretation and Infringement of Patents - Enforcement of Patents - Patents at the U.S. Supreme Court - Excerpt...more

A US and Australian comparison of “Means plus function”

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. ...more

4 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* 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.
×