CAFC vacates PTAB decisions in Netlist v. Diablo

Of note in the Netlist case


Netlist argues the Board’s constructions are wrong
because its analysis is based on a flawed interpretation of
“selectively electrically coupling.” We agree. The specification
uses the terms “coupling” and “isolating” in a
similar fashion. With respect to the ’150 patent, the
Board’s construction of “selectively isolating” seems to be
based on its erroneous construction of “selectively electrically
coupling.” The Board simply changed “making a
selection . . . to transfer power” into “making a selection
. . . and not transferring power.” Because we find the
Board’s analysis of “selectively electrically coupling” was
flawed, we also conclude the Board’s construction of
“selectively isolating/isolate” was erroneous.



AND footnote 1:


There appears to be a typographical error in the
Board’s final written decision for the ’536 patent. This
construction is taken from the Board’s institution decision,
which the Board stated that it intended to adopt for
its final written decision.