The Federal Circuit has become much less willing to enforce a claim that is broader than the specific embodiments described in the patent. Unfortunately, its decisions provide no guidelines for identifying such situations. Nor is the court consistent in its attacks on the problem. Sometimes it simply construes the claim as limited to the specific embodiment and finds no infringement. Sometimes it invalidates the claim for want of an adequate written description or for insufficient scope of enablement. It is suggested that a careful use of the reverse doctrine of equivalents would create stability and predictability with respect to this very difficult issue
The Federal Circuit, in Microsoft Corp. v. Multi-Tech Systems, Inc., used prosecution history from a...
In the post-Markman era, the Federal Circuit has focused attention on the public notice function of ...
In exchange for granting inventors a limited monopoly, the patent laws require inventors to enable ...
The Federal Circuit has become much less willing to enforce a claim that is broader than the specifi...
In several recent decisions, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has establis...
Specific exclusion has become a controversial limitation on the doctrine of equivalents, which is it...
FEDERAL CIRCUIT DECLINES TO FIND PATENT CLAIMS INDEFINITE FOR BROAD DESCRIPTIVE WORDS (AND AN ODE TO...
The uncertainty as to whether claim interpretation decisions will survive appeal is an ever growing ...
Possibly in response to criticisms that the U.S. patent system affords too much legal protection to ...
Two decades ago, the Supreme Court sought to promote more effective, transparent patent litigation i...
Claim construction jurisprudence is in disarray. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit r...
This Article examines the Federal Circuit\u27s review of claim constructions by lower tribunals to d...
Patent claim construction is a mess. The Federal Circuit’s failure to provide adequate guidance has ...
The strength of a patent as a legal instrument to protect an invention rests primarily on the drafti...
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is justifiably credited with the restoration of the pre...
The Federal Circuit, in Microsoft Corp. v. Multi-Tech Systems, Inc., used prosecution history from a...
In the post-Markman era, the Federal Circuit has focused attention on the public notice function of ...
In exchange for granting inventors a limited monopoly, the patent laws require inventors to enable ...
The Federal Circuit has become much less willing to enforce a claim that is broader than the specifi...
In several recent decisions, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has establis...
Specific exclusion has become a controversial limitation on the doctrine of equivalents, which is it...
FEDERAL CIRCUIT DECLINES TO FIND PATENT CLAIMS INDEFINITE FOR BROAD DESCRIPTIVE WORDS (AND AN ODE TO...
The uncertainty as to whether claim interpretation decisions will survive appeal is an ever growing ...
Possibly in response to criticisms that the U.S. patent system affords too much legal protection to ...
Two decades ago, the Supreme Court sought to promote more effective, transparent patent litigation i...
Claim construction jurisprudence is in disarray. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit r...
This Article examines the Federal Circuit\u27s review of claim constructions by lower tribunals to d...
Patent claim construction is a mess. The Federal Circuit’s failure to provide adequate guidance has ...
The strength of a patent as a legal instrument to protect an invention rests primarily on the drafti...
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is justifiably credited with the restoration of the pre...
The Federal Circuit, in Microsoft Corp. v. Multi-Tech Systems, Inc., used prosecution history from a...
In the post-Markman era, the Federal Circuit has focused attention on the public notice function of ...
In exchange for granting inventors a limited monopoly, the patent laws require inventors to enable ...