This inventor’s patent application for a computing device for arithmetic processes didn’t add up to a patentable invention. In re Mouttet, No. 2011-1451 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 26, 2012) (Judges Prost, O’Malley, and Reyna) Mouttet’s processor is built from two sets of intersecting conductive parallel wires. The two sets intersect at right angles, like a Tic-Tac-Toe […]
Category: Federal Circuit Spotlight
Patent Claim Construction — The Means Don’t Justify the Means
Ergo Licensing, LLC v. Carefusion 303, Inc., No. 2011–1229 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 26, 2012) (Judges Newman, Linn, and Moore) Means-plus-function claims can be tricky. A means-plus-function limitation lets a patentee claim a structure by describing its function, like a “means for attaching a door to a wall” or a “means for containing liquid,” instead of […]
Patent Malpractice — A Cautionary Tale
Landmark Screens, LLC v. Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius, LLP, No. 2011–1297 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 23, 2012) (Judges Bryson, Clevenger, and O’Malley) This is a malpractice case, and the conduct by Landmark’s former patent lawyer is pretty bad. The main issue before the court was whether Landmark’s fraud claim was barred by the statute of limitations, […]
When Patent Jurisdiction Gets Personal
Merial Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd., Nos. 2011-1471, -1472 (Fed. Cir. May 31, 2012) (Judges Lourie, Schall, and Reyna) Jurisdiction questions at the Federal Circuit usually relate to subject matter jurisdiction—whether the case encompasses issues that court has the authority to decide. In Merial, however, the jurisdiction question gets personal: how does the court determine if […]
The Delicate Declaratory Judgment Dance
3M Company v. Avery Dennison Corp., No. 2011–1339 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 26, 2012) (Chief Judge Rader and Judges Lourie and Linn) When is a threat of patent infringement not a threat? If a patent owner makes too much noise, the target may file a declaratory judgment action to get to court first (and get to […]
Patent Claim Construction: I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means
Here are a couple of recent cases involving claim construction issues. In both, the patent owner tried to argue that a term meant something different than what seemed to be the term’s plain meaning. In re Transaction Holdings Ltd., No. 2011–3061 (Apr. 23, 2012) (Judges Bryson, Schall, and Prost) (nonprecedential) This case combines an appeal […]