This Federal Circuit Opinion1 analyzes invalidity
based on anticipation and obviousness, more specifically based on
implicit claim construction of the claim limitation and inherent
disclosures.
Background
Sigray, Inc. ("Sigray") filed an Inter Partes Review
("IPR") petition challenging claims 1–15 of Zeiss
X-Ray Microscopy, Inc.'s ("Zeiss") U.S. Patent No.
7,400,704 (the "'704 Patent") as invalid for
anticipation and obviousness over various references. For claims 1,
3, and 4, Sigray alleged that S. Jorgensen et al.,
Three-Dimensional Imaging of Vasculature and Parenchyma in Intact
Rodent Organs with X-ray Micro-CT, Am. J. Physiology (Sept. 1998)
("Jorgensen"), which describes using an X-ray beam to
image rodent organs, anticipated these claims. Sigray further
argued that claims 2, 5, and 6 were rendered obvious, in part, by
Jorgensen.
