Category Archives: Claim Differentiation

Howmedica Osteonics Corp., Stryker Ireland Ltd. v. Zimmer, Inc., Wright Medical Technology, Inc., Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Docket No. 2015-1232, -1234, -1239 O’MALLEY, PLAGER, WALLACH May 12, 2016 Brief Summary: DC claim construction (“there is a fine line between reading a claim in light of the written description and reading a limitation into the claim from” it), … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation, Doctrine of equivalents, Written description | Leave a comment

Scott Clare et al. v. Chrysler Group LLC

Docket No. 2015-1199 PROST, MOORE, WALLACH March 31, 2016 Brief Summary: DC claim construction (e.g., (“the non-obvious appearance of the storage box is required of the claimed truck whether or not it deters theft”) and grant of SJ of non-infringement … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation | Leave a comment

Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC

Docket Nos. 2015-1513, -1514 MOORE, TARANTO, HUGHES March 15, 2016 Brief Summary: PTAB confirmation of claims claims 14-17 and 34-36 of Acceleron’s US 6,948,021 as not anticipated affirmed; cancellation of claims 3 (“that the Board denied Acceleron notice and a … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment

The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Symantec Corporation

Docket Nos. 2015-1146 PROST, DYK, HUGHES February 2, 2016 Brief Summary: DC claim constructions found to be correct based on the claim language read in view of the specification and prosecution histories. Summary: Columbia appealed DC claim construction of three … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation | Leave a comment

Cardsoft, LLC v. VeriFone, et al.

Docket Nos. 2014-1135 PROST, TARANTO, HUGHES December 2, 2015 Brief Summary: On remand from SCOTUS, DC construction of “virtual machine” again reversed and VeriFone was granted JMOL of no infringement. Summary: This opinion results from a SCOTUS remand of the … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation | Leave a comment

Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc. et al.ti

Docket No. 2015-1071, 2015-1105 MOORE, REYNA, TARANTO October 29, 2015 Brief Summary: DC decision of non-infringment affirmed based on claim construction. Arguments invoking the doctrine of claim differentiation were not persuasive. DC decision of no invalidity for anticipation or obviousness … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation | Leave a comment

Cephalon, Inc., Acusphere, Inc. v. Abraxis Bioscience, LLC, Celgene Corp. et al.

Docket No. 2014-1422, -1442 WALLACH, MAYER, CHEN June 17, 2015 Non-precedential Brief Summary: DC claim construction based on “widely accepted definition”, a textbook and expert testimony affirmed (patentees did not act as their own lexicographers). Summary: Acusphere appealed DC construction … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation | Leave a comment