ATLAS IP, LLC v. MEDTRONIC, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – Imprecisions about plurals and conjunctions found in the claim language should be resolved by context

by | Oct 29, 2015 | [sub] claim context, [sub] grammar, Claim Interpretation

Imprecisions about plurals and conjunctions found in the claim language should be resolved by context. Here, for example, a hub / remote device communication cycle having “intervals during which the hub and the remotes transmit and receive frames” was found to...

VASUDEVAN SOFTWARE, INC. v. TIBCO SOFTWARE, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (P) – Proper grammar is essential in both claim drafting and other statements relevant to claim interpretation

by | Apr 3, 2015 | [sub] grammar, Claim Interpretation

Proper grammar is essential in both claim drafting and other statements that may be used to construe the claims, such as arguments made during prosecution. Here, for example, the patentee argued during prosecution that “disparate” databases referred to an “absence of...