Fletcher Yoder(1) Claims surviving reexamination cannot be the sole basis for granting summary judgment that a claim is not invalid, (2) terms of degree do not require numerical precision to be definite, (3) damages apportionment can be done via the royalty base or the royalty rate.
Laches does not preclude a claim for damages incurred within the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation period
Traditionally, laches may bar equitable remedies like an injunction or royalties. Based on the common law related to patents, a laches defense may also bar legal remedies, thereby providing legal relief for damages in a patent infringement suit.
Laches does not bar plaintiff’s claim for infringement of copyright in a motion picture screenplay relating to conduct falling within Copyright Act’s three-year statute even though plaintiff did not file suit until 18 years after renewing the copyright.
Patentee appeals from summary judgment finding on the issue of infringement in defendant’s favor. Defendant appeals from summary judgment findings on the issues of laches, inequitable conduct, invalidity, and inventorship in patentee’s favor.
In International Rectifier, the Federal Circuit held that claim terms must be construed in accordance with the ordinary and customary meaning assigned to them by those skilled in the art unless the specification either 1) sets forth a different meaning or 2) uses words that manifest a “clear disavowal of claim scope.” The Court vacated the District Court’s summary judgment of infringement and remanded the case back to the District Court for consideration consistent with the Federal Circuit’s claim interpretation.
Accused infringer moving for summary judgment that infringement action is barred by laches has not demonstrated that patentee’s delay of three and one-half years, during which time it was undertaking reexamination of patent in suit, was an unreasonable delay in filing a claim for infringement.