February 12, 2007

I will periodically post case citations from the Federal Circuit along with the date of the opinion/order and a brief list of the legal topics discussed therein (specifically those with additional embedded case law citations). My goal is to post new cases on a weekly basis. This posting covers the patent cases that were appealed from the district court level and decided by the Federal Circuit during the sixth calendar week of 2007. All opinions are precedential unless otherwise indicated.

Medtronic Navigation, Inc., (formerly known as Surgical Navigation Technologies, Inc.), et al. v. Brainlab Medizinische Computersysteme GMBH, et al. (02/05/2007, non-precedential) (erratum: LINK): appeal of summary judgment of noninfringement of four patents as a matter of law (affirmed), discussion of patent relating to image-guided surgical products enabling the precise localization of surgical instruments during surgery. (U.S. Patent Nos. 4,722,056 (“Reference display systems for superimposing a tomagraphic image onto the focal plane of an operating microscope”), 5,383,454 (“System for indicating the position of a surgical probe within a head on an image of the head”), 5,389,101 and 5,603,318 (both “Apparatus and method for photogrammetric surgical localization”)), review of judgment as a matter of law, review of original claim construction based upon support solely within the specification, “claims are best construed to preserve their validity,” preclusion by prosecution history estoppel from asserting infringement under doctrine of equivalents based on narrowing of claim scope during prosecution, district court judge set aside jury verdict for infringement under doctrine of equivalents because testimony only supported direct infringement contentions and not equivalents

Dippin' Dots, Inc., et al. v. Mosey, et al. v. Esty, Jr., et al. (02/09/2007): appeal of claim construction, summary judgment of noninfringement, judgment that all claims are obvious, patent enforceable due to inequitable conduct, and antitrust violation for procurement of patent through fraud (affirmed all except antitrust counterclaim, which was reversed); discussion of patent relating to a process for making a form of a cryogenically-prepared novelty ice cream product (sold under Dippin’ Dots brand - U.S. Patent No. 5,126,156, Method of preparing and storing a free flowing, frozen alimentary dairy product”), issuance of patent in part by arguing commercial success to counter an obviousness rejection by the examiner, construction of term “bead” to mean having a “smooth spherical appearance” as supported by the specification, the term “comprising” raising a presumption that a list of elements is nonexclusive, “‘[c]omprising’ is not a weasel word with which to abrogate claim limitations,” prior art under the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) on-sale bar acting also prior art for obviousness purposes under 35 U.S.C. § 103, market testing sales not under the experimental use exception, inequitable conduct for not disclosing sales of product prior to application date, insufficient evidence to support Walker Process antitrust claim (fraud by omission)

0 comments:

Post a Comment

WIPO Press Releases

WIPO General News

Patent References

Click HERE to search issued U.S. Patents

Click HERE to search published U.S. Patent Applications

Click HERE to browse the MPEP (E8r6 in HTML and PDF, and E8r7 in PDF)

Click HERE to search patent assignments recorded with the USPTO

Click HERE to search Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations (rev. 7/1/08)

Click HERE to browse Title 35 of the U.S. Code

Click HERE to view current USPTO fees

Disclaimer

Copyright 2006-2010, Mark Reichel. The Daily Dose of IP is my personal website, and I am not providing any legal advice or financial analysis. Any views expressed herein should not be viewed as being the views of my employer, Ice Miller LLP. Any comments submitted to this blog will not be held in confidence and will not be considered as establishing an attorney-client relationship. Information submitted to this blog should be considered as being public information, and the submitter takes full responsibility for any consequences of any information submitted. No claims, promises, or guarantees are made or available regarding the completeness or accuracy of the information contained in this blog or otherwise available by searching from or linking away from this blog.

EPO Updates

Trademark References

Click HERE to search issued and pending U.S. Trademarks

Click HERE to search TTAB proceedings (via TTABVUE)

Click HERE to search trademark assignments recorded with the USPTO

The DDIP Author





Mark Reichel
Reichel IP LLC

I am a patent attorney with Reichel IP LLC, where I concentrate my practice on patent drafting and prosecution, trademarks, and general intellectual property matters. I currently focus on the preparation and prosecution of medical device and other life sciences patent applications, and being actively involved in a number of local not-for-profit organizations.

Click HERE to view my full professional bio at Reichel IP LLC.


There was an error in this gadget

Subscribe/Feedback

Click HERE to join the e-mail list for my blog

Click HERE to provide feedback on the DDIP blog

Fellow Blogs/Bloggers

AwakenIP (Kuester)
Counterfeit Chic (Scafidi)
I/P Updates (Heinze)
Internet Cases (Brown)
Likelihood of Confusion (Coleman)
Patent Baristas (Albainy-Jenei)
Patent Docs (Zuhn et al.)
Patently-O (Crouch)
The 271 Patent Blog (Zura)
The Ice Loop (Ice Miller LLP)
The Indiana Law Blog (Oddi)
The Invent Blog (Nipper)
The Patent Prospector (Odom)
The TTABlog (Welch)