Forewarned is forearmed? Doctrine of equivalents tested
$225.00
Description
Abstract: The doctrine of equivalents prevents would-be infringers from avoiding liability by making only minor changes to a patented invention. But what if a so-called equivalent was foreseeable at the time of the patent application, and the patentee still didn’t include it in the patent? The district court held that foreseeability didn’t preclude the application of the doctrine of equivalents, but nonetheless granted judgment of noninfringement. This article discusses the appeals court’s decision that the lower court was correct on the first point, but not the second. Ring & Pinion Service Inc. v. ARB Corporation, No. 2013-1238, Feb. 19, 2014 (Fed. Cir.)
Additional information
Year | |
---|---|
Niche | |
Newsletter | |
Issue | |
Word Count |