CAFC addresses "broadest reasonable interpretation" in Power Integrations; PTAB reversed

PTAB was reversed by the CAFC in Power Integrations:Because the board’s anticipation rejectionswere based on an unreasonably broad claim construction,we reverse.Of specifics:We acknowledged that “the board is not generallybound by a prior judicial construction of a claim term” andthat “in reexamination [the board] applies a differentclaim construction standard than that applied by a districtcourt.” Id. at 1326. We concluded, however, thatsince “Power Integrations’ principal argument to theboard about the proper interpretation of the term ‘coupled’was expressly tied to the district court’s claim construction,. . . the board had an obligation . . . to evaluatethat construction and to determine whether it was consistentwith the broadest reasonable construction of theterm.” Id. at 1327.On remand, the board acknowledged that this courthad expressed “concern” that its original decision hadfailed to assess…

Read more detail on Recent Intellectual Property Law posts –

Related news:

This entry was posted in Intellectual Property and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply