June 15, 2021
Authored and Edited by Christina Ji-Hye Yang; Elizabeth D. Ferrill; Abhinav Garg*
In Speedtrack, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., Nos. 2020-1573, 2020-1660 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2021), the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court for the Northern District of California’s final judgment of noninfringement based on claim construction.
Speedtrack’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,544,360, is directed to a method of organizing computer files. The user assigns each file one or more category description, which is later used to locate the file. For example, a recipe file can be assigned “French,” “Bread,” and “Recipes,” whereas the pertinent prior art, U.S. Patent No. 5,047,918 (“Schwartz”), has a hierarchical structure requiring an “attribute” such as “recipes” and a “value” such as “bread.”
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that the patentee disclaimed the use of hierarchical structures within its category descriptions. During the prosecution, Speedtrack argued that Schwartz’s hierarchical structure “fell outside the scope of the amended claims” and narrowed the claims by adding the limitation “the category descriptions having no predefined hierarchical relationships….” During the litigation, Speedtrack argued that the claim was amended to distinguish from Schwartz. The Federal Circuit held that these statements are sufficient to find a clear and unmistakable disclaimer of the claim scope.
prosecution history estoppel, direct infringement, claim construction, prior art, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
*Abhinav Garg is a Summer Associate at Finnegan.
Copyright © 2021 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.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.