About: Doctrine of equivalents   Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbkwik.org associated with source dataset(s)

The doctrine of equivalents is a judicially-created theory for finding patent infringement when the accused process or product falls outside the literal scope of the patent claims. The essential objective inquiry is: “Does the accused product or process contain elements identical or equivalent to each claimed element of the patented invention?” As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in its Festo opinion, the doctrine raises issues of claim transparency that affect the public:

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • Doctrine of equivalents
rdfs:comment
  • The doctrine of equivalents is a judicially-created theory for finding patent infringement when the accused process or product falls outside the literal scope of the patent claims. The essential objective inquiry is: “Does the accused product or process contain elements identical or equivalent to each claimed element of the patented invention?” As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in its Festo opinion, the doctrine raises issues of claim transparency that affect the public:
sameAs
dcterms:subject
dbkwik:itlaw/prope...iPageUsesTemplate
abstract
  • The doctrine of equivalents is a judicially-created theory for finding patent infringement when the accused process or product falls outside the literal scope of the patent claims. The essential objective inquiry is: “Does the accused product or process contain elements identical or equivalent to each claimed element of the patented invention?” As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in its Festo opinion, the doctrine raises issues of claim transparency that affect the public: The doctrine of equivalents, however, “renders the scope of patents less certain. . . . If competitors cannot be certain about a patent’s extent, they may be deterred from engaging in legitimate manufactures outside its limits, or they may invest by mistake in competing products that the patent secures.” The Federal Circuit in Festo gave these considerations precedence, emphasizing the notice value of claims in finding a complete bar to application of the doctrine of equivalents to claim elements narrowed during the course of a prosecution. The Supreme Court ultimately softened the appellate court’s ruling, however, making the bar a matter of rebuttable presumption.
Alternative Linked Data Views: ODE     Raw Data in: CXML | CSV | RDF ( N-Triples N3/Turtle JSON XML ) | OData ( Atom JSON ) | Microdata ( JSON HTML) | JSON-LD    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software