United States Federal Circuit

In an interference proceeding before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences relating to patents for light-emitting diode replacement tubes for fluorescent light tubes, the Board's denial of plaintiff's preliminary motions claiming that defendant's copied claims were unpatentable for lack of written description support as required by 35 U.S.C. section 112 is vacated and remanded because the Board erred in construing defendant's claims in view of defendant's disclosure rather than plaintiff's closure, as Agilent Techs., Inc. v. Affymetrix, Inc., 567 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009) held that when a party challenges written description support for an interference count or the copied claim in an interference, the originating disclosure provides the meaning of the pertinent claim language.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/05/2010
• Published 05/05/2010

Judges

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel