Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> FileWrapper

Intellectual Property Law

: FileWrapper

Claims requiring an "insert" do not cover products with similar structure not "inserted"

By McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.

In a decision Wednesday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court ruling granting summary judgment of non-infringement.  At the outset, the court noted the patent at issue had been before the court multiple times, and the claim terms at issue in this appeal had already been construed by the court in earlier cases.

As the district court applied the Federal Circuit's earlier construction, the court had little trouble affirming on the claim construction issues.  As to infringement, the Federal Circuit likewise affirmed the district court's summary judgment of no infringement, as one group of accused products lacked at least one claim element (and there was insufficient information to generate a fact question under the doctrine of equivalents), and the other group of accused products lacked another claim element.

More detail of Miken Composites, L.L.C. v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co. after the jump.

[More]

Full post as published by FileWrapper on February 08, 2008 (boomark / email).