Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 JUNE 2021

Statements Made In Litigation Can Support Prosecution History Estoppel

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 Speedtrack, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., Nos. 2020-1573, 2020-1660 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2021), the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court for the Northern District of California's final judgment of noninfringement based on claim construction.

United StatesIntellectual Property

In Speedtrack, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., Nos. 2020-1573, 2020-1660 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2021), the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court for the Northern District of California's final judgment of noninfringement based on claim construction.

Speedtrack's patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,544,360, is directed to a method of organizing computer files. The user assigns each file one or more category description, which is later used to locate the file. For example, a recipe file can be assigned "French," "Bread," and "Recipes," whereas the pertinent prior art, U.S. Patent No. 5,047,918 ("Schwartz"), has a hierarchical structure requiring an "attribute" such as "recipes" and a "value" such as "bread."

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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from