Claims, element

If an accused device does not literally infringe a patent claim because it lacks some element of that claim, it may infringe under the doctrine of equivalents if it contains some element that is insubstantially different from the claim element which it lacks. Warner-Jenkinson Co., Inc. V. Hilton Davis Chemical Co., 520 U.S. 17, 35-36 (1997). 

Every single one of the claimed elements fell within the range set out in the 451 prior art application. In its holding, the Court affirmed the obviousness finding by the USPTO and explained that [Sjelecting a narrow range from within a somewhat... 

In the section emphasis has been placed on the three key components of written description, enablement, and best mode. Each of these three requirements is separate and distinct, so that is how they will be treated in this chapter. Though it might seem obvious, each of the three sections of the written description requirement applies to the claimed invention only. It is surprisingly easy to get caught up with peripheral aspects of the invention that do not directly involve claimed elements and, as a result, overinterpret the ambit of 112 f 1. Likewise, it is easy to forget that written description is required for all of the elements in a claim and as a result, attempt to make claim amendments during patent prosecution that do not find adequate written description support in the patent specification. Making the claim elements the focus will help to keep one on track with respect to 112 f 1 issues. 

Literal infringement focuses on individual claim elements rather than on the invention as a whole. Whether a product infringes the claims of the patent depends on whether the product literally embodies each and every element of those claims. Each element of a claim is material and essential to the definition of the invention. If the product or process does not use even one element of the patent claim, it will not literally infringe the claims. However, the accused infringer usually cannot escape liability for literal infringement merely by adding elements that are not found in the patent claims if each element cited in the claims is found in the product or process under investigation. 

Although the requirements of literal infringement may not be satisfied, infringement may still be found under the Doctrine of Equivalents. This doctrine is satisfied when the product in question contains elements identical or equivalent to each claimed element of the patented invention. ... 

Recently the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that when a claim limitation is narrowed during prosecution, application of the doctrine of equivalents to that claim element is completely barred. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., 234. 3d 558 (Fed. Cir. 1999), vacated and remanded, 122 S. Ct. 1831 (2002). Although the... 

Fmdl Probability of falsely claiming element present ... 

Being based mostly in social sciences, organisation science principally aims to be explanatory, though management researchers claim elements of predictive power from their theoretical analysis, mostly through prescriptive comments that commence Managers should. . 

This article, particularly tailored to cover plastics materials produets, provides an overview of the three major theories under which a products liability action may be initiated, namely negligence, breach of warranty and strict products liability. Negligence liability claim elements of duty owed by the manufacturer, breach of duty, causation and damages are discussed. Also, discussed are claims brought under the theories of breach of warranty and strict products liability. 

Products Co., 339 U.S. 605, 607, 70 S.Ct. 854, 94 L.ED. 1097 (1950). Therefore, under literal infringement, each claim element must be found in the alleged infringing device, product or method. 

The scope of a patent claim is not limited to its literal terms. It embraces all equivalents to claim elements. 

In a doctrine of equivalents inquiry, each alfcgedly equivalent element or step in an accused product or method must substantially match the function, way and result of the claimed element or step,... 

---