Federal Circuit Clarifies Rule on Completeness of Patents in a Sequence By Sarah Sorscher — Edited by Johnathan Jenkins Zenon Environmental, Inc. v. United States Filter Corp. Federal Circuit, November 7, 2007, No. 2006-1266 Slip Opinion On November 7, the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court of the Southern District of California, which had found Zenon’s patent for a water filtration device not invalid by reason of anticipation in a bench trial. The Federal Circuit held that, because an intervening ... Read More...

Federal Circuit Narrows Willful Infringement Standard, Clarifies Waiver Issue With Respect to Opinion Letters By David Lawson In Re Seagate Technology, LLC Federal Circuit, Miscellaneous Docket No. 830, Aug. 20, 2007 Slip Opinion On August 20, the Federal Circuit, en banc, changed its standard for evaluating the willfulness of patent infringement for the purpose of awarding enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, making it much more difficult for patentees to demonstrate willful infringement. The court also clarified the application ... Read More...

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd. (“SMC”)
Federal Circuit, No. 05-1492, July 5, 2007
Slip Opinion

On July 5, in the latest decision in a nearly-twenty-year saga which has cumulatively proven enormously important in defining the scope of the doctrine of equivalents, the Federal Circuit (Dyk, J.) held that an existing equivalent can be foreseeable at the time of a patentee’s amendment, even if it would have been impossible for an observer of ordinary skill in the art to foresee at the time of amendment that the equivalent would ultimately satisfy the tests for equivalence. In the court’s words:

An equivalent is foreseeable if one skilled in the art would have known that the alternative existed in the field of art as defined by the original claim scope, even if the suitability of the alternative for the particular purposes defined by the amended claim scope were unknown.

Slip Op. at 21.

Read More...