Omission Of Claim Feature More Significant To Claim Interpretation Than That Feature's Inclusion In Specification Embodiment
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.02.07
The Federal Circuit, in Saunders Group, Inc. v. Comfortrac, Inc., (No. 2006-1576, June 27, 2007), reverses and remands a district court’s grant of summary judgment finding noninfringement, after determining that the district court improperly limited the scope of certain claims to include a feature that was not recited in the claims. In so doing, the panel concludes that the change in claim language between the parent application and the continuation-in-part application, and the resulting inclusion of the particular claim feature in certain claims and its omission from other claims, “is a sufficiently powerful indicator as to the proper construction of the asserted claims that outweighs the portion of the specification in which the invention is described narrowly.” The claim construction issue is made particularly difficult, says the panel, by the failure of the applicants to expressly state to the examiner the extent to which they intended their new claims to depart from the scope of the claims in the predecessor applications.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.29.25
President Trump Issues Executive Order Deprioritizing Disparate Impact Theory of Discrimination
On April 23, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy, declaring it the policy of the United States “to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals.” The order reasons that “disparate impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability.”
Client Alert | 6 min read | 04.28.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.28.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.25.25