Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 MAY 2001

Festo Defines Equivalents Boundaries

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Federal Circuit delivered one of its most anticipated opinions in recent years in its Festo decision, concluding that claim elements added during prosecution which narrow the claim are entitled to no range of equivalents.

Question 1:

For the purposes of determining whether an amendment to a claim creates prosecution history estoppel, is "a substantial reason related to patentability" limited to those amendments made to overcome prior art under Section 102 and Section 103, or does "patentability" mean any reason affecting the issuance of a patent?

Answer:

A "substantial reason related to patentability" is not limited to overcoming or avoiding prior art, but includes any reason that relates to the statutory requirements of a patent.

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