Latest Posts › Claim Construction

Share:

Federal Circuit Schools USPTO On Broadest Reasonable Claim Construction

In recent decisions, the Federal Circuit has found error in the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s approach to obviousness rejections, including its reliance on the doctrine of routine optimization without evidence of an...more

CAFC Finds ANDA Infringement Despite Differences Between FDA Labeling And Claim Language

In a non-precedential decision issued in Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Breckenridge, and...more

Angiomax Patents Limited To Example

In The Medicines Co. v. Mylan, Inc., the Federal Circuit construed composition claims of two Angiomax patents as requiring the recited “batches” to be made by a specific “efficient mixing” process illustrated in one of the...more

Construing Markush Group Claims

In Multilayer Stretch Cling Film v. Berry Plastics, the Federal Circuit provided a detailed discussion of the construction of claims that use Markush group language. The decision emphasizes the closed nature of the...more

Federal Circuit Emphasizes Reason In Application Of Broadest Reasonable Interpretation

As we wait for the Supreme Court decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, where the Court has been asked to decide whether the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) should apply the “broadest reasonable...more

Federal Circuit Answers Questions About Covered Business Method Review Proceedings

In Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc., the Federal Circuit outlined the permitted extent of judicial review of Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review proceedings conducted by the USPTO Patent Trial and...more

Federal Circuit Upholds Broadest Reasonable Interpretation in Inter Partes Review

A divided Federal Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc that would have required the court to revisit its decision in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC (Fed Cir 2015), that upheld the USPTO’s use of the...more

Federal Circuit Reverses Unreasonable PTAB Claim Construction, Upholds Idle Free Standard for Motions to Amend

The Federal Circuit decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc., addressed several important issues relating to post-grant patent trials conducted by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), including the PTAB’s...more

Dependent Claims Give Rise to Improper Broadening Reissue

In ArcelorMittal France v. AK Steel Corp., the Federal Circuit found that the addition of a dependent claim to a reissue application improperly broadened the scope of the original independent claims beyond the two-year period...more

Court Cites Objects of Invention in Claim Construction

Pacing Technologies, LLC v. Garmin International, Inc. is one of those Federal Circuit decisions that may send patent practitioners running to their files to double-check the phrasing used in their patent applications. Not...more

Why Did the Supreme Court GVR the Shire Lialda Case?

On January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded Shire Development LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., to the Federal Circuit “for further consideration in light of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,...more

Supreme Court Calls for Some Deference in Claim Construction Standard of Review

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., finding that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure call for some deference in the claim construction standard of...more

Federal Circuit Vacates Infringement of Braintree SUPREP Patent

In a divided opinion issued in Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court on one of two challenged claim construction issues and vacated the district court’s finding of...more

Federal Circuit Finds Easy Solution to Avodart Solvate Written Description Question

Are claims that recite a “solvate” of a chemical compound invalid for lack of written description if the patent does not describe any specific solvates? In GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Banner Pharmacaps, Inc., the Federal Circuit...more

Split Federal Circuit Hews to De Novo Claim Construction Review

In a six-four en banc decision in Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North Am. Corp., a divided Federal Circuit confirmed its practice of de novo claim construction review. The main question arising from the...more

Takeda Prevacid SoluTab Patent Valid, But Not Infringed

In Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that Zydus’s proposed generic product infringed Takeda’s Prevacid® SoluTab™ patent, but...more

Federal Circuit Reverses Board Rejections That Strayed From Claim Construction

In the non-precedential decision in In re Eaton, the Federal Circuit reversed the USPTO Board decision affirming rejections of anticipation and obviousness. The court found that the Board decision strayed from its own claim...more

Federal Circuit Finds Flexibility in Admissibility of Expert Testimony on Infringement

In MeadWestVaco Corp. v. Rexam Beauty and Closures, Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the admissibility of expert testimony that was not fully aligned with the district court’s claim construction. In so doing, the court...more

Federal Circuit Finds LUNESTA Patent Infringement Based on ANDA Product Description Not Avoided by Other Certifications

In Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district’s holding of no Lunesta® patent infringement that was based on a certification submitted to the court, and found...more

Federal Circuit Holds Patentee to Functional Claim Language

In Bayer Cropscience AG v. Dow AgroSciences LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s claim construction that interpreted “2,4-D monooxygenase” in accordance with its established scientific meaning, even though...more

Claim Construction Not Illuminated By Ambiguous Restriction Requirement

In Plantronics, Inc. v. Alph, Inc., the Federal Circuit rejected arguments that the election made in response to the Restriction Requirement limited the scope of the claims in a manner that was not reflected in the claim...more

In Uship Federal Circuit Finds Prosecution History Disclaimer in Arguments Against Restriction Requirement

In Uship Intellectual Properties, LLC v. United States, the Federal Circuit upheld the claim construction applied by the Court of Federal Claims when it held that the United States and IBM Corporation did not infringe the...more

Federal Circuit Holds That Patent Indefiniteness Requires Insoluble Ambiguousness

In Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that the claims at issue were invalid as indefinite, because the claims were not “insolubly ambiguous.” This case...more

Federal Circuit to Reconsider De Novo Review of Claim Construction

In a nonprecedential order issued March 15, 2013, the Federal Circuit granted rehearing en banc in Lighting Ballast Control, LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp., to consider the following questions: 1. ...more

24 Results
/
View per page
Page: of 1

"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.