Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 JANUARY 2017

Bringing Prosecution History Back Into Claim Construction Under Broadest Reasonable Interpretation

Jones Day
Jones Day
Contributor
Jones Day

Jones Day

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,400 lawyers in 40 offices across five continents....

View firm profile
Explore more from Jones Day

In D'Agostino v. MasterCard Int'l Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeal Board invalidation decisions in two related inter partes review proceedings, holding that the Board's claim construction was unreasonable.

United StatesIntellectual Property

In D'Agostino v. MasterCard Int'l Inc. 2016-1592 & 2016-1593, the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeal Board invalidation decisions in two related inter partes review proceedings, holding that the Board's claim construction was unreasonable. The patents at issue were D'Agostino's U.S. Patent Nos. 7,840,486 and 8,036,988. Both patents cover methods for facilitating a secure credit card transaction by using a transaction code instead of the credit card number itself.

The central issue before the Court was how to construe the "single merchant" limitation in the challenged claims. Claim 21 of the '988 patent, a representative of the "single merchant" claims, recites in pertinent part "said single merchant limitation being included in said payment category prior to any particular merchant being identified as said single merchant."

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from