United States Federal Circuit

In a patent infringement action wherein the district court partially sustained a jury's verdict on infringement, denied plaintiff's request for injunctive relief, imposed a compulsory license, awarded plaintiff enhanced damages, and denied defendant's post-judgment motions for a judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, judgment is reversed and remanded in part where the district court: 1) incorrectly construed a vital term featured prominently in each asserted infringement claim; and 2) erred in a ruling that prior art did not anticipate claim 16, and this error also infected the scope of the prior art for assessing the validity of the rest of the claims.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/18/2008
• Published 04/18/2008

Judges

• RADER, Circuit Judge., Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, RADER and MOORE, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Larry R. Laycock, Workman Nydegger, of Salt Lake City, UT, argued for plaintiff-cross appellant.   With him on the brief were Charles L. Roberts, C.J. Veverka, and David R. Todd. Of counsel on the brief was Stanley J. Panikowski, DLA Piper U.S. LLP, of San Diego, CA.


• For Appellees:
  
• Gregory A. Castanias, Jones Day, of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellants.   With him on the brief were Jennifer L. Swize, of Washington, DC, and Victor G. Savikas, Louis L. Touton, and Kevin G. McBride, of Los Angeles, CA.