September 12, 2013

Federal Circuit Decisions for Week Ending September 6, 2013

Bayer CropScience AG v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, No. 2013-1002, (September 3, 2013) (precedential) (3-0) Patent No. 6,153,401

Key point:

  • Broad functional claim language, and more specifically a broad class of enzymes defined by their function, must meet the standards of structural identification as required under 35 U.S.C. §112.

Soverain Software LLC, v. Newegg Inc., No. 2011-1009, (September 4, 2013) (Precedential) (3-0) Patent No. 5,7515,314

Key point:

  • When a dependent claim and the independent claim it incorporates are not separately argued, precedent guides that absent some effort at distinction, the claims rise or fall together.

Accenture Global Services, GMBH. v. Guidewire Software Inc., 2011-1486 (September 5, 2013) (precedential) (2-1), Patent No. 7,013,284

Key points:

  • System claims that offer no meaningful limitations beyond their counterpart patent-ineligible method claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. §101.
  • System claims that fail to include limitations that set them apart from abstract ideas are invalid under 35 U.S.C. §101.

Comaper Corporation v. Antec Inc., 2013-1147 (September 6, 2013) (Non-Precedential) (3-0), Patent No. 5,955,955

Key point::

  • While a claim does not recite the size of the device, the relative size of the claimed elements can matter in terms of the claim language, context and meaning.

Wawrzynski v. H.J. Heinz Company, No. 2012-1624, (September 6, 2013) (precedential) (3-0) Patent No. 5,676,990

Key point:

  • Mere reference to a patent in a complaint asserting state law claims does not create jurisdiction for appeal to the Federal Circuit under the well-pleaded complaint rule.

Related Team: