United States Federal Circuit

The "flexible bar" approach should not be used to determine the proper scope of equivalents, and where amendments narrowed the literal scope of claim limitation related to patentability, prosecution history estoppel acts as a complete bar to the application of the doctrine of equivalents.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/30/2001
• Published 05/01/2001

Judges

• Before SCHALL, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Edward V. Filardi,Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP, of New York, NY, for plaintiff appellant.   With him on the brief were Robert B. Smith, of New York;  and David W. Hansen, of Palo Alto, California.


• For Appellees:
  
• James H. Wallace, Jr., Wiley, Rein and Fielding LLP, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee.   With him on the brief were Gregory R. Lyons, John B. Wyss and Scott E. Bain.