Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 SEPTEMBER 2018

Claim Construction: The Never-Ending War Of Words

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

In view of His Honor's claim construction, Blackbird stipulated to infringement, and the district court entered judgement in favor of the defendants.

United StatesIntellectual Property

PTAB Decision:  Blackbird Tech LLC v. ELB Electronics, Inc., 2018 WL 3421094 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

Background:  Blackbird is the owner of U.S. Patent 7,086,747, which is directed to energy efficient lighting apparatuses. Blackbird sued for infringement of claim 12 of the '747 patent in the District of Delaware. Claim 12 reads:

12. An energy-efficient lighting apparatus for retrofit with an existing light fixture having a ballast cover, comprising:

a housing having an attachment surface and an illumination surface; ...

and

a fastening mechanism for securing the attachment surface of the lighting apparatus to the illumination surface ....

(emphasis added)

Issue:  The parties disputed the meaning of the claim term "attachment surface," specifically whether the attachment surface must be secured to the ballast cover of the existing light fixture. Blackbird proposed the construction "layer of the housing to which the illumination surface is secured,"

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