It is common knowledge that the scope of patent claims is decided by courts, not juries. In fact, however, that is not entirely true. While the U.S. Supreme Court held in Markman v. Westview Instruments that claim construction is a question for the court, and some U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cases contain broad language about the court's responsibility for determining claim scope, other cases consistently affirm that there is inherent imprecision in many claim terms and it is the jury's job to resolve resulting issues of claim scope.
The pending en banc review in Lighting Ballast Control v. Philips Electronics North America has focused attention on the respective roles of district court and appellate court in claim construction. But the line between judge and jury is equally important. Identifying that line is difficult, with seemingly inconsistent guidance in different cases on where to find it. Yet failing to do so correctly is perilous, as shown by a pair of recent cases in which the Federal Circuit held that a party waived infringement arguments that depended on claim scope by failing to ask the district court for an appropriate claim construction ruling.
The Jury's Role in Determining Claim Scope
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
