 |
** ITC DID NOT IMPROPERLY CONSTRUE CLAIM LIMITATION DURING INITIAL DETERMINATION
Bissell, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 24-1509, 24-1709 — Yesterday in an opinion by Judge STOLL, the Federal Circuit affirmed an International Trade Commission determination that Tineco’s redesigned wet dry surface cleaning devices did not infringe Bissell’s patents because they did not meet a claim limitation that required the battery charging circuit be disabled by actuation of the product’s self-cleaning mode. Bissell argued the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by relying on improper claim construction and the doctrine of claim vitiation in its infringement determination.
The Federal Circuit disagreed. The ALJ did not construe or establish the scope of the limitation but “merely applied the ordinary meaning of the claim language,” determined Bissell’s expert was not “credible or persuasive,” and found the accused products’ battery charging circuit was not totally disabled during its self-cleaning cycle. The ALJ also properly determined there was no infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, holding that Bissell’s expert testimony as to the insubstantial difference between the claimed product and a product that charged during a self-cleaning cycle was not persuasive.
(1 to 4 stars rate impact of opinion on patent & trademark law)
UPC JUDGES SCHILLING AND THOMAS TO SPEAK AT IPO’S EUROPEAN PRACTICE CONFERENCE ON MAY 28
IPO’s European Practice Committee is organizing a conference entitled “Watch Your Words – Claim Interpretations, Estoppel, Information Sharing, Chat Bots and Much More.” The 2026 event will take place on May 28 at Gesellschaftshaus Palmengarten in Frankfurt, Germany. Judge RONNY THOMAS (UPC Düsseldorf Local Division) will discuss developments in claim construction at the UPC, and Judge STEFAN SCHILLING (UPC Hamburg Local Division) will discuss information sharing among IP professionals in court proceedings. Visit the conference website for more information or to register.
 |
TODAY ON THE IP CHAT CHANNEL™: IMPLEMENTATION OF LONG-ARM JURISDICTION BY THE UNIFIED PATENT COURT AND GERMAN NATIONAL COURTS: STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Join the IP Chat Channel™ today at 11:00am ET for a webinar on the Unified Patent Court and German National Courts. Recent decisions by German courts and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) are significantly expanding the reach of European patent litigation after the decision of the European Court of Justice in BSH v. Electrolux. This webinar will provide a high level, practice-oriented overview of how long-arm jurisdiction is currently being applied in Germany and at the UPC—and what this means for companies with global patent portfolios. Using landmark decisions such as Bayer/Regeneron v. Formycon, in which injunctive relief was granted for multiple EPC member states and drawing on the approach taken in Onesta v. BMW, where U.S. patents were asserted before a German court, the speakers will discuss emerging litigation strategies, enforcement opportunities, remaining open questions and risks for in house legal teams. The session will focus on practical takeaways for companies navigating cross border patent enforcement in Europe.
 |
IP Chat Channel™ webinars are free for IPO members. Advance registration is required. CLE offered in most states.