Tag: claim construction
-
Satius Holding v. Samsung: Clear Claims Can Still Be Invalid When They Cover the Impossible
The Federal Circuit’s precedential decision in Satius Holding, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2025-1446 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 1, 2026), illustrates a counterintuitive principle of patent law: the clarity of a patent claim can establish precisely why it is invalid. The court held that a claim expressly covering a scientifically impossible method of transmitting…
-
NCS Multistage v. Nine Energy Service: Federal Circuit Applies Sanho to AIA § 102(b)(1)(B) and Vacates Patent Judgment
The Federal Circuit’s precedential decision in NCS Multistage Inc. v. Nine Energy Service, Inc., Case No. 2025-1000 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 14, 2026), vacated an infringement and no-invalidity judgment after identifying two claim-construction errors and rejecting the patent owner’s attempt to use an earlier private sale as a defensive “public disclosure” under the America Invents Act.…
-
Moskowitz v. Globus: Limiting Preambles and the Cost of Leaving Claim Terms Unconstrued
The Federal Circuit’s precedential decision in Moskowitz Family LLC v. Globus Medical, Inc., Case No. 24-1696 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 11, 2026), illustrates two different ways claim scope can become fixed before appeal. For U.S. Patent Nos. 8,353,913 and 9,889,022, the intrinsic record made the preamble term “universal” part of the claimed invention. For U.S. Patent…
-
Socket Solutions v. Import Global: Federal Circuit Demands Doctrinal Discipline Before Granting Preliminary Patent Injunctions
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Socket Solutions, LLC v. Import Global, LLC, Case No. 2025-1121 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 4, 2026), illustrates that preliminary patent injunctions do not alter the governing standards of claim construction or equitable relief. Because a preliminary injunction can remove products from the marketplace long before infringement has been finally adjudicated, courts…
-
Board of Regents v. Boston Scientific: Federal Circuit Reverses Jury Verdict on Anticipation and the Meaning of “Fiber”
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. Boston Scientific Corp., Case Nos. 2024-2062 and 2024-2063 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2026), reverses a patent-infringement judgment involving drug-eluting coronary stents and illustrates how a jury verdict cannot survive when the asserted distinctions from the prior art are absent from…
-
Ridge Corp. v. Kirk NationaLease: Federal Circuit Rejects Preliminary Injunction Based on Claim Construction and Speculative Harm
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Ridge Corp. v. Kirk NationaLease Co., Case No. 25-1254 (Fed. Cir. July 13, 2026), reverses a preliminary injunction against competing manufacturers of roll-up truck doors, holding that substantial questions of noninfringement and an inadequately supported claim of irreparable harm prevented the patent owner and its licensee from obtaining extraordinary pretrial…
-
Wyeth v. AstraZeneca: Federal Circuit Invalidates Cancer-Treatment Claims for Failure to Enable Patient Dosing
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Wyeth LLC v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Case No. 2024-2325 (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2026), affirms that a patent claiming daily administration of a therapeutically effective drug dosage to a patient must teach more than laboratory activity and broad projected dosage ranges. The specification must provide sufficient guidance for a skilled…
-
TrackTime v. Amazon.com: Federal Circuit Requires Contextual § 112(f) Analysis for Software Claim Terms
The Federal Circuit’s decision in TrackTime, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Case No. 2024-1102 (Fed. Cir. July 2, 2026), clarifies how courts must determine whether software claim language invokes means-plus-function treatment under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), particularly when a claim recites “executable program code” configured to perform specified operations. The court vacated a judgment that…
-
Otsuka v. Hetero Labs: Federal Circuit Upholds Patent Injunction but Requires Rule 65(c) Bond
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Hetero Labs Limited, Case No. 2025-2016 (Fed. Cir. July 1, 2026), upheld a preliminary injunction delaying the launch of a generic version of Nuedexta but vacated the district court’s decision allowing the patent owner to obtain that injunction without posting security under Federal Rule of…
-
Actelion v. Mylan: Federal Circuit Limits Equivalents Theory After Ambiguous pH Claim Construction
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 24-1641 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2026), provides an important reminder that scientific terminology in patent claims is not interpreted in a vacuum. Even seemingly straightforward numerical limitations can become highly contextual when industry standards, measurement conventions, and prosecution history intersect. In…