Means-Plus-Function

News & Analysis as of

Court Construes Various Means Plus Function Terms

Lifeport Sciences LLC v. Endologix, Inc., C.A. No. 12-1791 - GMS, July 9, 2015. Sleet, J. The court considers 10 terms for construction from four patents....more

Federal Circuit Attacks Functional Claim Drafting Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

In Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Networks, the Federal Circuit affirmed yet another dismissal of a patent infringement lawsuit due to the asserted patent being invalid for lacking patent eligible subject matter under 35...more

Federal Circuit Expands Scope of Functional Claiming

A recent Federal Circuit panel decision in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC altered the evidentiary standard for determining whether a patent claim employs means-plus-function language. Specifically, the court expressly...more

IP Newsletter - July 2015

In This Issue: - En Banc Federal Circuit Abandons “Strong” Presumption That a Limitation Is Not Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, Paragraph 6 - Supreme Court Rejects Belief of Invalidity Defense for Inducement in Commil...more

Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC (Fed. Cir. 2015)

On September 23, 2010, Eon filed suit against seventeen defendants in the District Court of the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,663,757. During the case, the '757 patent went through two...more

Only Basic Functions of a Processor Avoid Need for Disclosed Algorithm - EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC

Addressing the question of what corresponding structure must be disclosed to support a means-plus-function claim element, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court finding that eight...more

The Federal Circuit Alters the Means-Plus-Function Analysis

The Federal Circuit’s recent en banc opinion in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10082, *2 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2015) (Williamson II) may result in courts finding that more claims include...more

Practical Claim and Specification Drafting, Following Williamson v. Citrix

Patent claims that use so-called “nonce words” in lieu of means plus function language can be correctly construed as applying the equivalent of means plus function language under 35 USC §112, sixth paragraph, and can be...more

Lessons From the Rare Grant of an IPR Motion to Amend

Although many Patent Owners have complained about the high hurdles for amending claims in an IPR, the Board’s decision in Riverbed Technology, Inc. v. Silver Peak Systems, Inc. IPR2013-00403 shows that the requirements are...more

Corporate E-Note - June 2015

In this Issue: - IRS Issues Guidance on Portability: The IRS recently issued final regulations that provide guidance on the federal estate and gift tax applicable exclusion amount, in general, as well as the...more

Federal Circuit Revisits and Recasts Means-Plus-Function Claim Interpretation

An en banc decision from the Federal Circuit last week overruled a line of cases governing the interpretation of functional claim language, calling into question how courts, the PTO, and industry will treat such language in...more

Federal Circuit alters functional claiming landscape in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC

In Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, No. 2013-1130, the Federal Circuit recently overruled earlier precedent and eliminated the “strong” presumption that a functional claim limitation lacking “means” language does not invoke...more

Williamson Decision Will Encourage Patent Defendants to Challenge Software Claims

In Williamson v. Citrix Online, announced on June 16, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a partially en banc opinion that claims expressed in terms of functionality can be subject to statutory requirements...more

Federal Circuit Defers To District Court’s Factual Finding That “Voltage Source Means” Connotes Sufficient Structure To Avoid...

Today, the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in Lighting Ballast v. Philips on remand from the Supreme Court after the Teva decision changed the standard of review of a district court’s claim construction. One of the more...more

Federal Circuit Creates a New Standard For Means-Plus-Function Claim Elements

On June 16, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC et al. that changes the way courts should analyze means-plus-function elements under 35 USC...more

IP Newsflash - June 2015 #2

DISTRICT COURT CASES - District Court Required Identification of Prior Art in Defendant’s Counterclaim of Invalidity - In the Southern District of New York, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss...more

Fed Circuit Decision Gives Broad Patents New Concerns

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals overruled prior precedent this week in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC and lowered the standard for patent invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (f)—the statute that requires functional claims...more

Williamson v. Citrix Online Highlights Potential Unintended Consequences of Functional Limitations in Patent Claims

In Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, No. 2013-1130 (Fed. Cir., June 16, 2015), the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled earlier opinions and held that the absence of the word “means” does not justify a “strong”...more

What Was Old Is New Again for Means + Function Claim Elements

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc for the limited purpose of revisiting when claims invoke the means-plus-function language of 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6 (§ 112(6)) (now § 112(f)) replaced a part of...more

Federal Circuit Decreases Strength of Presumption Against Treatment of Patent Claims as Means-Plus-Function

Accused infringers challenging patent claims now have a new arrow in their quiver as a result of yesterday's holding in Williamson v. Citrix Online, et al. In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit replaced an earlier...more

En Banc Federal Circuit Broadens What Constitutes A Means-Plus-Function Limitation (Williamson V. Citrix)

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Williamson v. Citrix that includes an en banc portion that broadens the circumstances in which claim limitations may be deemed means-plus-function limitations. This appears...more

En Banc Federal Circuit Abandons “Strong” Presumption That a Limitation Is Not Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, Paragraph 6

On June 16, 2015, the Federal Circuit revisited its prior precedent regarding when a claim limitation is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, paragraph 6. In Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, No. 13-1130 (“Citrix”), the en banc court...more

“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

26 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2

"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 to create your digest 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. Or, sign up using your email address.
×