[Patent Pod] Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Andrew Lahser
Aug 16, 2005, 1:33:33 AM8/16/05
to mypat...@googlegroups.com
[http://www.patentpod.com/sound/2005/august/Freedman-Seating-Company-v-American-Seating-Company.mp3]
The C.A.F.C. held that applying the Doctorine of Equivalents to the claim limitation "slidably mounted" to find a "rotatably mounted" apparatus infringing would "completely vitiate" the claim limitation.
--
Posted by Andrew Lahser to Patent Pod at 8/15/2005 10:15:00 PM
The C.A.F.C. held that applying the Doctorine of Equivalents to the claim limitation "slidably mounted" to find a "rotatably mounted" apparatus infringing would "completely vitiate" the claim limitation.
- MP3: Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company(Fed. Cir. 2005) (citations omitted)
- PDF: Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company(Fed. Cir. 2005) (full text)
- I/P Updates: Doctrine of Equivalents Must Not 'Vitiate' Limitation
- Patently-O: CAFC Further Vitiates Doctrine of Equivalents
- Patent Prospector: Have A Seat
--
Posted by Andrew Lahser to Patent Pod at 8/15/2005 10:15:00 PM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages