直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

A Piece of Federal Circuit History

April 5, 2018

Authored and Edited by Elizabeth D. Ferrill

On April 5, 1995, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., a decision that impacted patent litigation in the United States probably more than any other since the inception of the court.  Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967 (Fed. Cir. 1995), aff'd, 517 U.S. 370 (1996).  The court held, in an opinion written by Judge Archer, that construction of patent claims, which define the scope of the patentee’s rights under the patent, is a matter of law exclusively for the court, rather than a matter of fact.  The court settled the inconsistencies in its precedent and found that “in a case tried to a jury, the court has the power and obligation to construe as a matter of law the meaning of the language used in the patent claim.” Id. at 979.   The Supreme Court granted certiorari and unanimously affirmed the Federal Circuit decision on April 23, 1996. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996).  In an opinion written by Justice Souter, the Supreme Court held that the construction of patent claims, including terms of art within the claims, was within the province of the court, in light of the existing precedent, the suitability of interpretations issues for determination by judges, and the importance of uniformity in treatment of a given patent. 

Tags

Federal Circuit History, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2018 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Reception

2026 IPO Education Foundation Awards Dinner

December 15, 2026

Washington, DC

Panel Discussion

2026 Advanced Patent Law Institute

December 3-4, 2026

Stanford

Conference

IPBC Asia 2026

November 17-19, 2026

Tokyo

Conference

2026 ANA Masters of Advertising Law Conference

November 2-4, 2026

Huntington Beach

Conference

Life Sciences Patent Network North America Fall 2026

November 2-3, 2026

San Francisco

Conference

2026 AIPLA Annual Meeting

October 29-31, 2026

Washington, DC

Lecture

2026 Donald R. Dunner Endowed Lecture

October 27, 2026

Washington, DC

Conference

LES 2026 Annual Meeting

October 18-21, 2026

San Diego

Conference

2026 FCBA Global Series Fall Session

October 14-16, 2026

Dublin

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP