Skip to content

Overseas Infringement

Plaintiffs alleging infringement of patented Web browser technology may seek damages under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f), which prohibits manufacturing components of patented invention in United States to be assembled elsewhere, […]

Prosecution History Estoppel

Narrowing amendment to independent claim at issue was not inadvertent, and was made for substantial reason related to patentability, namely, to avoid prior art.  Prosecuting attorney’s declaration that narrowing limitation […]

Direct Infringement

A party cannot avoid direct infringement of a process or method patent merely by having another entity connected to it perform one or more of the required steps.  Under such […]

Inequitable Conduct

Inventors made misrepresentations in example in specification for claimed thermostable enzyme by writing example in past tense, since reader of patent would conclude that purification protocol described in example was […]

Defining Claim Term

Term “co-micronization,” as used in composition and method claims for fenofibrate, does not take its ordinary and accustomed meaning, and is properly construed to require micronization of fenofibrate and solid […]

Means-Plus-Function Claim

Limitation in claim for image processing apparatus that recites “a destroying member for destroying said thermally processed film after said film has been scanned” is means-plus-function limitation, since term “a […]

Offer for sale

“Commercial offer for sale” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) requires communication that offeree could make into binding contract by simple acceptance; special master, proceeding under assumption that “contract law principles […]

Declaratory Judgment

Threats of infringement against entire product industry can create reasonable apprehension among all individual members of that industry, and defendant’s comments in newspaper articles, directed to omeprazole drug industry as […]