Last year, the Federal Circuit decided UltimatePointer, LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. UltimatePointer brought a patent Infringment suit against Nintendo for its Wii console which uses indirect-pointing remote control devices. The district court ruled for Nintendo on summary judgment concluding that direct-pointing devices, and not indirect-pointing devices, were within the scope of the claims of UltimatePointer’s patent. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling, reasoning that the specification of the patent repeatedly emphasize that the invention is directed to a direct-pointing device and that there are disadvantages with indirect pointing devices. This decision underscores the importance of the specification on how claims are construed. As seen in UltimatePointer, LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., a court may limit the scope of a claim based on the content of the specification.
Thursday, 12 January 2017 13:00
Claim Construction in UltimatePointer v. NintendoWritten by David Roncayolo
Published in Patent
Latest from David Roncayolo
- U.S. Supreme Court grants writ of certiorari in Helsinn Healthcare S.A., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
- Continued Infringement Costs Apple
- Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope Of On Sale Bar In Helsinn Healthcare, S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc.
- State Actors may assert Sovereign Immunity against institution of an Inter Partes Review