The outcome did not go well for the Board
This is a patent case involving lighted artificial trees.
Polygroup Limited MCO appeals from the final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter
partes review upholding the patentability of claims 7, 10,
11, 16, 18–22, 25, 26, and 28 of U.S. Patent No. 8,454,186
and claims 1–3, 5–9, 11, 12, 14, and 15 of U.S. Patent
No. 8,454,187. With respect to every claim except claim 7
of the ’186 patent, we reverse the Board’s determination
that Polygroup failed to establish the unpatentability of
the challenged claims. We conclude that the Board applied
erroneous claim constructions and that, under the proper
constructions, Miller teaches every limitation of claims 10,
11, 16, 18–22, 25, 26, and 28 of the ’186 patent and claims
1–3, 5–9, 11, 12, 14, and 15 of the ’187 patent. Polygroup
has, therefore, established that these claims are unpatentable.
For claim 7 of the ’186 patent, the Board exceeded the
scope of our remand when it considered a combination of
Miller and Lessner. We therefore vacate and remand its
decision with regard to claim 7 of the ’186 patent.
No comments:
Post a Comment