United States Federal Circuit

In a patent dispute involving computer keyboard positioning systems, denial of defendant's motion for a determination of inequitable conduct, a judgment finding a patent invalid for anticipation and obviousness, and summary judgment finding that defendant did not infringe another patent are affirmed where: 1) the district court properly instructed the jury and did not abuse its discretion in limiting certain testimony; 2) there was no genuine issue of material fact that accused devices did not possess a "sidewall" limitation as properly construed; and 3) there was no abuse of discretion in denying defendant's motion for a determination of inequitable conduct.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/13/2006
• Published 07/13/2006

Judges

• LINN, Circuit Judge., Before BRYSON, LINN, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Edmund J. Sease, McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C., of Des Moines, Iowa, argued for plaintiff-appellant.   With him on the brief were Jeffrey D. Harty, Robert A. Hodgson, and John D. Goodhue.


• For Appellees:
  
• George Pazuniak, Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP, of Wilmington, Delaware, argued for defendant-cross appellant.