« Terminal Disclaimer | Main | The Art of the Patent »
December 22, 2011
Assembly
Consider
an apparatus claim to an "assembly," with structures "bonded" to each
other at surfaces (4,884,631).
One would construe the claim to be of a single thing. But the courts
are disingenuous, exercising bias by nuanced misconstruction. In this case,
that the claimed assembly "must be separate parts," when the claim
clearly states otherwise. The asserting plaintiff: a mere patent
holder. The defendants: household name corporations Sony &
Lenovo, neither American, but both large corporations facing a
court-despised species: "patent troll." Now there's an excuse for
injustice.
ICHL v. Sony Electronics and Lenovo (CAFC 2011-1202) nonprecedential; Judges Lourie (author), Schall and Prost
This crap by the courts doesn't deserve quoting. The story is that the plain language of the claims is ignored to dissemble in light of the specification, providing the unjustified basis to load the claims with an extra limitation; a practice blatantly against blackletter law. The upshot of the denouement: summary judgment of noninfringement because of the damning claim construction. Such economic violence by the courts is business as usual.
Posted by Patent Hawk at December 22, 2011 9:33 PM | Claim Construction