The U.S. Supreme Court held 8-2 today that the Federal Circuit may no longer ignore some rulings by trial court judges on how to construe patent claims. The outcome marks a major victory for parties that win the often-decisive battles over claim construction in Markman hearings in district court.
Will High Court Curb the Federal Circuit?
A rule that has applied in patent cases since 1998 may go the way of Chevy Cobalt ignition switches.
"Deference, I Don't Have to Show You any Stinkin' Deference" riffed on a line from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948), in which Gold Hat, posing as a Mexican Federale, says
Google’s “Street View” Can’t Dodge Patent Claims, Federal Circuit Holds
The Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit erred when he booted patent infringement claims against "Street View", the Google feature that lets you look at images of houses, buildings, and other objects that line streets and highways online.
The mistake came in how Chief Judge Alex Kozinski construed a phrase — "substantially elevations" — that described the
Deference? I Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinkin’ Deference
A crucial part of a patent case involves the Markman hearing. There, the district judge listens to and sees evidence, PowerPoints, blow-ups, claim charts, and arguments that each side puts forward in hopes that Her Honor will choose their version of what the words of the patent claims mean.
You might wonder why they
Limits of Language, Patent-Wise
Your patent claims a device that "attach[es]" to a "flexible" thingy.
Does "attach" require that the device touch only the outside of the thingy? Or can it also attach to the thingy's innards? And must the thingy flex "easily" or just enough to seem, well, flexible?
The district court ruled that the attachment element of