Claims Construction Order in Wide, Short Ski Case against K2
One interesting snippet from this Order is that Judge Lasnik all but ignored evidence from a patent attorney as to what these words ought to mean, saying "Absent evidence that [the patent attorney] is one skilled in the art of designing and/or manufacturing skis, his opinion regarding the proper interpretation of the claim terms is not useful to the Court." (citing Network Commerce, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 422 F.3d 1353, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (quoting Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1318).
NelsonvK2claimsconstruction.pdf
Labels: 5603522, K2, patent attorneys seattle, patent litigation seattle, Paul Nelson, wide short ski
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home