United States Federal Circuit

The district court erred in interpreting the "air circulation means" limitation as requiring structure capable of recirculating air because the limitation should not have been restricted to structure that was disclosed in the preferred embodiment, but was not necessary to perform the recited function.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/06/2001
• Published 02/06/2001

Judges

• LOURIE, Circuit Judge., Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John M. Collins,Hovey, Williams, Timmons & Collins, of Kansas City, Missouri, argued for plaintiff-appellant.   With him on the brief were Scott R. Brown and Jill D. Singer.


• For Appellees:
  
• Kirk M. Hartung, Zarley, McKee, Thomte, Voorhees & Sease, PLC, of Des Moines, Iowa, argued for defendants-appellees.   With him on the brief was Jeffery D. Harty.