Another erroneous district court claim construction
In the non-precedential Engineered Products v. Donaldson, we have another erroneous claim construction by a district court.
The CAFC found that the district court erred in its construction of "means for selectively disengaging." The CAFC cited Frank's Casing, 389 F.3d 1370 (CAFC 2004) and Default Proof, 412 F.3d 1291.
There was a procedural issue. A summary judgment [SJ] motion was treated as a motion to amend under Rule 15 by the district court, and the CAFC found this an abuse of discretion.
The CAFC found that the district court erred in its construction of "means for selectively disengaging." The CAFC cited Frank's Casing, 389 F.3d 1370 (CAFC 2004) and Default Proof, 412 F.3d 1291.
There was a procedural issue. A summary judgment [SJ] motion was treated as a motion to amend under Rule 15 by the district court, and the CAFC found this an abuse of discretion.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:32 AM
1 Comments:
SEOBook Blogger Sued Over Comments Seeking Legal Donations
Aaron's story has become national news as the Wall Street Journal covered his situation yesterday and bloggers all over the world have supported Aaron as this lawsuit has the potential to go all the way to the ...
Hi There, just blog surfing and came across yours – like it!
I have a affirmations site. It is all to do with affirmations related things.
Check it out if you find the time :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home