In Norian, the Federal Circuit held that the claim term “consisting of” is not necessarily exclusive and that additional components irrelevant to the invention can be included in an accused product. The Court also held in dicta that misstatements made during prosecution are matters of unenforceability not invalidity and thus do not affect the presumption of validity of a patent. Further, the Federal Circuit held that for a publication to qualify as 102(b) prior art, there must be substantial evidence that the publication was publicly available.
Results for “consisting of
view Case Detail Download PDF