Although it is unclear whether PTAB decisions are given
collateral estoppel effect in district court proceedings, PTAB
decisions are at least persuasive authority. And as one court
observed, "ignoring the PTAB decision entirely smacks of
folly." Yet, a third time was not the charm when a defendant
argued the same position to the court three times, the third coming
after a contradictory PTAB ruling.
The case of Microwave Vision, SA et al v. ESCO Technologies,
Inc. et al., 1-14-cv-01153 (GAND September 20, 2016) involves
claims directed to over-the-air measurement devices, including
multi-probe systems. The relevant claims were written in
means-plus-function format, requiring corresponding structure to be
disclosed in the specification or else the claims would be found
indefinite. At issue was whether the "network of probes"
and "support" in the claims are both required to pivot,
or if only one of the elements is pivotable. Defendant argued the
claims are broad enough
