JA N U A RY 1 9 9 9 Last The Federal Circuit month at DISCLAIMED CLAIMS NOT PART OF “ORIGI- PATENTEE’S GAMBLE “PAYS OFF” ON M ont h at a Glance NAL PATENT” FOR REISSUE PURPOSES GAMBLING MACHINE PATENT In case of first impression, Court rules that because Absent bad faith, notice of patent to competitor’s disclaimer is effective back to original patent issue customers is not tortious interference with business date, reissue claims filed after two-year broadening practices. Mikohn Gaming Corp. v. Acres Gaming, period cannot be broader than claims remaining Inc. , No. 98-1216 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 30, 1998). . . . . .4 after disclaimer. Vectra Fitness, Inc. v. TNWK Corp. , No. 98-1192 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 14, 1998) . . . . . . . . .1 PARTY SANCTIONED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION UNDER PRO- TECTIVE ORDER DRAWINGS AND SAMPLES DEMONSTRATE Deposition transcripts and exhibits containing confi- THAT CLAIMED INVENTION WAS “READY FOR dential information must be returned or destroyed PATENTING” FOR PURPOSES OF ON-SALE BAR under protective order. Mikron Indus. Inc. v. Addressing the on-sale bar for the first time since Tomkins Indus., Inc. , No. 98-1179 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 10, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Pfaff v. Wells 1998)(nonprecedential decision). . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 E lecs., Inc. , 1998 U.S. LEXIS 7268 (Nov. 10, 1998), COURT “DEFLATES” ATHLETIC SHOE INFLAT- the Federal Circuit disclaims “ totality of the circum- stances” test and finds on-sale bar given drawings ABLE BLADDER APPLICATION and samples, despite continued “ fine tuning” of Teachings that invention can be used with a basket- nonclaimed features. Weatherchem Corp. v. ball or tennis shoe supports claimed “ tongue” limi- J .L. Clark , Inc. , No. 98-1064 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, tation. No support, however, for “ bladder” associ- 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 ated with the tongue or for air pump and relief valve “ accessible exteriorly” of the shoe. In re Lakic , No. 98-1248 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 17, 1998)(nonprece- “COMPRISING” CANNOT RESTORE EXCLUDED dential decision). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Washington, DC SUBJ ECT MATTER 202-408-4000 STATIC-DISSIPATING PATENT “MAKES NOISE” Broad claim term “ comprising” does not permit infringement finding where patentee distinguished FOR ALLEGED INFRINGER now accused structure to obtain patent’s allowance. Court upholds summary judgment of noninfringe- Spectrum Int’l., Inc. v. Sterilite Corp., No. 98-1243 ment on certain accused products, but finds gen- Palo Alto 650-849-6600 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 uine issues of material facts as to others. Charleswater Prods., Inc. v. Nevamar Corp. , No. 97- 1402 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 10, 1998) (nonprecedential CLAIMS NARROWED DURING REEXAMINA- decision). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Atlanta TION INVOKE INTERVENING RIGHTS 404-653-6400 After a decade of litigation, the Federal Circuit finds DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH PATENT OW NERSHIP that patentee cannot collect damages prior to issue date of reexamination certificate. Laitram Corp. v. Summary judgment appropriate given sufficient Tokyo NE C Corp. , No. 98-1060 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 18, time to translate necessary documents and prepare 011-813-3431-6943 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 necessary affidavits. Filtroil, N.A., Inc. v. Maupin , No. 98-1212 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 3, 1998)(nonprecedential decision). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Brussels INTERFERENCE CONTINUES DESPITE COMMON 011-322-646-0353 OWNERSHIP OF TWO APPLICATIONS IN EX-LICENSEE “STUNNED” BY CONCEALED THREE-WAY PROCEEDING STUN BELT PATENT Interference board shows good cause to continue Attempts to design around fail. Court affirms sum- interference involving an issued patent and two mary judgment of infringement. R.A.C.C. Indus., commonly owned applications given uncertainty of Inc. v. Stun-Tech, Inc. , No. 98-1186 (Fed Cir. Dec. 2, final count and incompleted discovery. Barton v. 1998) (nonprecedential decision) . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Adang , No. 97-1491 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 1998) . . . .3 EDITED BY VINCE KOVALICK This publication brings you a synopsis of patent cases decided last month by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit based on slip opinions received from the court. You can review and download the full text of each opinion by visiting our Web site ( www.finnegan.com ).
Recommend
More recommend
