ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, INC. v. COVIDIEN, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – Measurement techniques for a claimed value need not be specified if understood by one of ordinary skill

by | Aug 7, 2015 | [sub] clarity, Indefiniteness

There is no requirement for the specification to identify a particular measurement technique for ascertaining a claimed value or range of values as long as such an understanding is within the scope of knowledge possessed by one of ordinary skill in the art. Here, for...

ALLERGAN, INC. v. SANDOZ INC. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – A prior art range is not anticipatory when there is material and unpredictable variation across the range

by | Aug 4, 2015 | [sub] broad prior art disclosures, Anticipation

A range disclosed in the prior art does not anticipate a claimed invention falling within that range when it can be shown that there is material and unpredictable variation across the range. Here, for example, a prior art disclosure of a composition comprising...

CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY v. MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – An element comprising another element having a claimed characteristic is not an independent such element

by | Aug 4, 2015 | [sub] application to claims, Anticipation

An element comprising another element having a claimed characteristic is not a separate and independent element having that characteristic. Here, for example, an invocation function invoking a signal-dependent branch metric function in combination with the...

SOCIEDAD ESPANOLA v. BLUE RIDGE X-RAY COMPANY (Fed. Cir. 2015) (NP) – Ambiguous claims terms will be generally interpreted consistent with the focus of the specification

by | Jul 31, 2015 | [sub] consistency, Claim Interpretation

Ambiguous claims terms will be generally interpreted consistent with the focus of the specification. Here, for example, the claimed “two insulated chambers” were found to require no more than mere electrical insulation based on the patent’s overall focus on electrical...