Posts Tagged: claim construction


Federal Circuit affirms Apple iPhone patent victory over GPNE

GPNE sued Apple for direct infringement of claims in two of GPNE’s patents. The patents at issue relate to a two-way paging system, where the paging …
By Gene Quinn & John M. Rogitz
15 hours ago 0

Board Cannot Adopt New Claim Construction Without Giving Notice to the Parties

The Federal Circuit held that the Board’s changed claim construction of “data flow,” violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), even if it was correct. In particular, …

Court Affirms Claim Construction of ‘Alias’ was Limited by Specification to Mean Text

The Court agreed with Facebook in that these claim terms had no accepted meaning in the art, which meant that they cannot be construed broader than the …

Patent’s Non-Standard Use of “Fractionation” Limits Scope of the Claims

The Court found that “fractionation” referred only to distillation-based techniques. The specification’s use of the term “fractionation” controlled even if the definition was idiosyncratic. By that …

Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement and Untimely Assertion of DOE Infringement

The Federal Circuit found that the specification explicitly supported the district court’s claim construction, which precluded a finding of infringement. Two passages specified the meaning of, …

New PTAB Rules Level the Playing Field for Patent Owners in IPR

After much public comment and debate, new changes to rules for post-grant administrative trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) go into effect on May 2, 2016. …
By Ben Pleune & Pamela Councill
4 months ago 8

Federal Circuit reverses PTAB claim construction in IPR appeal

Pride Mobility appealed, and noted that the Board construed claim 7 as requiring a "substantially planar" mounting plate "oriented perpendicular" to the axis of the wheelchair's drive wheel, …

BRI v. Plain and Ordinary Meaning in Claim Construction: Much Ado About Nothing?

On one hand, logic dictates that the broader the interpretation of the claim, the more extensive the array of relevant prior art—and in turn the more …
By Sarah Barrows
4 months ago 17

BRI and Phillips are No Different – Unified Patents Responds

Unified Patents Inc. explained in its amicus brief in Cuozzo Speed v. Lee that “[t]he phrase ‘broadest reasonable interpretation’ describes the same procedure applied in both …
By Scott A. McKeown
4 months ago 28

CAFC: Claim construction is appropriate even where term has a plain and ordinary meaning

Clare sued Chrysler for infringement of two patents on hidden storage boxes for pick-up trucks. Clare argued that the limitations do not need a construction because the …

BRI in IPR may be narrower than broadest ordinary meaning, broader than Phillips standard

The Court noted that the Board failed to account for how the claims and specification inform the ordinary skilled artisan as to what ordinary definition the patentee …

Patent Claim Interpretation: The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard

The broadest reasonable interpretation standard is frequently referred to simply as BRI within the industry. The Patent Office applies the broadest reasonable interpretation in virtually all circumstances. …
By Gene Quinn
6 months ago 12

Federal Circuit Reiterates High Standard for Prosecution History Disclaimer

In a January 29, 2016 decision, the Federal Circuit vacated a jury judgment of non-infringement and ordered the District of Delaware to conduct a new trial where construction of …

Wi-LAN suffers Federal Circuit defeat to Apple in patent dispute

Wi-LAN argued that even if they could not prove direct infringement, a structure that performs the steps in the reverse order should properly be found to infringe …
By Gene Quinn
7 months ago 5

CAFC uses de novo review because claim interpretation based solely on intrinsic evidence

On remand, the Federal Circuit used the de novo standard. Teva’s deferential “clear error” standard did not apply, because the district court did not make any …