Thursday, January 16, 2014

CAFC orders remand in Superior Industries v. Masaba

Superior Industries v. Masaba

Superior conceded that it could not prevail on
its infringement claims against Masaba
and successfully moved for summary judgment of non
-infringement and dismissal of Masaba’s invalidity counterclaims.

What happened?

because it is unclear from the record
how the disputed construction
s relate to infringement, we vacate
the district court’s judgment and remand for further

Judge Rader noted

relevant to this case, a system claim
generally covers what the system is,
not what the system does. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch
& Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir.
1990); see also Roberts v. Ryer
, 91 U.S. 150, 157 (1875) (“The inven-
tor of a machine is entitled to the benefit of all the uses to
which it can be put, no matter whether he had conceived
the idea of the use or not.”). Thus, it is usually improper
to construe non-functional claim terms in system claims
in a way that makes infringement or validity turn on
their function. Paragon Solutions, LLC v. Timex Corp.,
566 F.3d 1075, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2009).


Post a Comment

<< Home