Results for claim construction

Littelfuse, Inc. vs. Mersen USA EP Corp.

Case Number: CLB0499

Date: 04.04.2022

Under the doctrine of claim differentiation, an independent claim is broader than a claim that depends from it; thus, if a dependent claim reads on a particular embodiment, the corresponding independent claim must cover that embodiment as well.

view Case Detail Download PDF

Akeva L.L.C. v. Nike, Inc., Adidas America, Inc.

Case Number: CLB0468

Date: 07.16.2020

A disclaimer in the specification of a patent specifically excludes subject matter from the invention possessed by the patentee. Removing limitations by rescinding the disclaimer in further continuation patents broadens the description of the invention and would not be within the scope of the invention as described in the prior patent.

view Case Detail Download PDF

WAG Acquisition, LLC v. WebPower, Inc.

Case Number: CLB0462

Date: 08.26.2019

To anticipate a negative claim limitation, the prior art need not expressly exclude an element when the exclusion of the element can be proven by affirmative evidence showing that the prior art suggests or describes instances in which the element is optional or unnecessary.

view Case Detail Download PDF

Owens Corning v. Fast Felt Corp.

Case Number: CLB0406

Date: 10.11.2017

Motivation to combine references will not be extinguished based only on preferred or selected embodiments. To successfully argue that prior art references teach away from combination, there needs to be a showing that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to combine the prior art to reach any of the embodiments within the scope of the challenged claims.

view Case Detail Download PDF

In re Power Integrations, Inc.

Case Number: CLB0410

Date: 03.19.2018

Although reexamination proceedings are not generally bound by prior judicial construction of a claim term, a claim term still must be given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification.

view Case Detail Download PDF