This document discusses patent infringement in general. It outlines that patent infringement occurs when someone makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports a patented invention within the US during the patent term without permission. It describes how the patent claims define the invention and are interpreted broadly by the Patent Office examiner and Patent Trial and Appeal Board during prosecution and post-issuance review. Courts interpret the claims more narrowly during litigation and consider the specification, file history, expert testimony and dictionaries in their analysis. Statements made during prosecution can also result in file wrapper estoppel that limits the scope of the claims.
This document discusses patent infringement in general. It outlines that patent infringement occurs when someone makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports a patented invention within the US during the patent term without permission. It describes how the patent claims define the invention and are interpreted broadly by the Patent Office examiner and Patent Trial and Appeal Board during prosecution and post-issuance review. Courts interpret the claims more narrowly during litigation and consider the specification, file history, expert testimony and dictionaries in their analysis. Statements made during prosecution can also result in file wrapper estoppel that limits the scope of the claims.
This document discusses patent infringement in general. It outlines that patent infringement occurs when someone makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports a patented invention within the US during the patent term without permission. It describes how the patent claims define the invention and are interpreted broadly by the Patent Office examiner and Patent Trial and Appeal Board during prosecution and post-issuance review. Courts interpret the claims more narrowly during litigation and consider the specification, file history, expert testimony and dictionaries in their analysis. Statements made during prosecution can also result in file wrapper estoppel that limits the scope of the claims.
This document discusses patent infringement in general. It outlines that patent infringement occurs when someone makes, uses, sells, offers to sell, or imports a patented invention within the US during the patent term without permission. It describes how the patent claims define the invention and are interpreted broadly by the Patent Office examiner and Patent Trial and Appeal Board during prosecution and post-issuance review. Courts interpret the claims more narrowly during litigation and consider the specification, file history, expert testimony and dictionaries in their analysis. Statements made during prosecution can also result in file wrapper estoppel that limits the scope of the claims.
general OUTLINE Statute: 35 USC 271 Purpose Of Claims Interpretation by PTO Examiners Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Interpretation (construction) by courts Markman hearing File Wrapper Estoppel
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general STATUTE: 35 USC 271 whoever without authority MAKES USES, OFFERS TO SELL SELLS IMPORTS any patented invention, within the US or into the US during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent .
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Purpose of Claims Numbered paragraphs after the end of the specification which particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as his invention. 35 USC 112 a.
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Purpose of Claims Claims provide the concise formal definition of the invention; the metes and bounds. Claims are an inexact verbal portrayal of the inventive concept that is arrived at during the prosecution stage where the words are often changed so as to be different (unobvious) from the prior art.
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Interpretation by PTO Examiner The Examiner examines the patent application and will do a prior art search. Usually he/she will reject the claims (70%+) as being too broad so as to read on the selected references. Examiner applies the broadest possible interpretation of the claims In this prosecution of the patent application the applicant can then modify the claim language, traverse the arguments of the Examiner or both.
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Interpretation by PTO PTAB Under the 2013 America Invents Act (AIA), the PTAB was constituted to examine issued patents. Even though the patent has been granted, the PTAB applies the broadest possible interpretation of the claims This is much broader than the courts, but the Fed. Cir. upheld this standard. It means that with a broader interpretation there is a greater chance that the claim will read on the prior art and be invalid.
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Interpretation (construction) by courts Markman hearing The court will construe the meaning of the patent language, but cannot change it.
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Interpretation (construction) by courts Markman hearing Intrinsic evaluation Looks to the claim language itself; to the specification; to the file history
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general Interpretation (construction) by courts Markman hearing Extrinsic evaluation Looks to Expert testimony Dictionaries Treateses
PATENT LAW- Infringement in
general File Wrapper Estoppel (file history estoppel) A traditional type of extoppel where the affirmative comments and/or acquesence by the applicant in trying to get the patent can limit the coverage of the claims. For example, if in order to differentiate over a reference, you say a protective plate touches the body of the container, then you cannot later argue that the plate was spaced from the container.