REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2894 Ex Parte Shim et al 11336110 - (D) WARREN 102/103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP TRAN, TONY
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Park et al 11508300 - (D) ADAMS 103 103 MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC LUONG, PETER
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1735 Ex Parte Hashimoto et al 12516092 - (D) KOKOSKI 103 WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP PATEL, DEVANG R
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2187 Ex Parte LUBBERS et al 11771411 - (D) COURTENAY 112(1)/112(2) 102/103 McCarthy Law Group PARIKH, KALPIT
2194 Ex Parte Gikas et al 11311759 - (D) STRAUSS 112(1) 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION KRAFT, SHIH-WEI
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2651 Ex Parte Zhu et al 11113852 - (D) JENKS 103 ADDMG - BlackBerry BLAIR, KILE O
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2872 Ex Parte Hyde et al 12584791 - (D) BEST 102/103 THE INVENTION SCIENCE FUND CLARENCE T. TEGREENE ALLEN, STEPHONEB
REEXAMINATION
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3751 PLAS-PAK INDUSTRIES, INC. Requester, Appellant v. SULZER MIXPAC AG Patent Owner, Respondent 95001656 7815384 11/563,791 SONG 103 K&L Gates LLP Third Party Requester: CANTOR COLBURN LLP LEWIS, AARON J original WALCZAK, DAVID J
DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3751 PLAS-PAK INDUSTRIES, INC., Requester, Appellant v. RICHARD PARKS CORROSION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Patent Owner, Respondent 95001371 7,144,170 11/003,449 KERINS 103 K&L Gates LLP LEWIS, AARON J original WALCZAK, DAVID J
FEDERAL CIRCUIT
VACATED AND REMANDED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3672 SUPERIOR INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MASABA, INC., Defendant-Appellee 2013-1302 7,470,101 11/975,205 7,618,213 11/631,975 CLEVENGER concurring RADER SJ non-infringement claim construction Dicke, Billig & Czaja, PLLC; Woods, Fuller, Shultz & Smith, P.C. FOX, CHARLES A; LAGMAN, FREDERICK LYNDON
First, in claim construction, one must not import limitations from the specification that are not part of the claim. Deere & Co. v. Bush Hog, LLC, 703 F.3d 1349, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2012). Indeed, claims generally are not limited to any particular embodiment disclosed in the specification, even where only a single embodiment is disclosed. Innova/Pure Water, Inc. v. Safari Water Filtration Sys., Inc., 381 F.3d 1111, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Second, and relevant to this case, a system claim generally covers what the system is, not what the system does. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see also Roberts v. Ryer, 91 U.S. 150, 157 (1875) (“The inventor of a machine is entitled to the benefit of all the uses to which it can be put, no matter whether he had conceived the idea of the use or not.”). Thus, it is usually improper to construe non-functional claim terms in system claims in a way that makes infringement or validity turn on their function. Paragon Solutions, LLC v. Timex Corp., 566 F.3d 1075, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Innova/Pure Water Inc. v. Safari Water Filtration Sys. Inc., 381 F.3d 1111, 72 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 2004) 2173.05(g)
DONNER 10: 675-83
HARMON 6: 118, 121, 158, 169, 327; 10: 348
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 15 USPQ2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2114
DONNER 14: 89, 175, 217
HARMON 1: 172; 4: 205; 7: 241, 278
paragon HARMON 6: 71, 169c, 188, 450
