by Steve Driskill | Mar 22, 2016 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, [sub] specification, Claim Interpretation, Estoppel / Disclaimer
The disclosure-dedication rule does not require that the specification explicitly label which embodiments are “alternatives” to bar otherwise apparent alternatives from infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. Here, for example, even though the specification...
by Steve Driskill | Jan 8, 2016 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation
Even small differences in operation or design can be sufficient to defeat infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. Here, for example, a parallel architecture that inverted the order of operations for data encoding as compared to the claimed invention, and...
by Steve Driskill | Mar 23, 2015 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation
Infringement under the doctrine of equivalents is not foreclosed simply by the claimed limitation being the literary “antithesis” of the accused infringer’s corresponding feature. Here, for example, no substantial difference was found between deoxygenating before or...
by Steve Driskill | Feb 19, 2014 | [sub] corresponding structure, [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation, Means Plus Function
“There is no … foreseeability limit on the doctrine of equivalents,” even for “the application of the doctrine of equivalents for means-plus-function limitations.” Background / Facts: The patent being asserted here is directed to an improved automobile locking...
by Steve Driskill | Aug 27, 2013 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation
The doctrine of equivalents is unavailable as a matter of law “if a theory of equivalence would entirely vitiate a particular claim element.” Be careful not to draft or amend a claim element in such a way that would unduly limit it to a particular kind of element...
by Steve Driskill | Jul 26, 2013 | [sub] doctrine of equivalents, Claim Interpretation
This is the latest installment in a string of cases from the Federal Circuit attempting to curb what it sees as an abuse of the vitiation doctrine when considering equivalency. For vitiation to apply and bar equivalency, the element at issue must really be the...