There was a claim construction issue in SOCIEDAD ESPANOLA DE ELECTROMEDICINA YCALIDAD, S.A. v. Blue Ridge ; Phillips was cited:Claim terms are generally given “the meaning thatthe term would have to a person of ordinary skill in theart in question at the time of the invention.” Phillips v.AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (enbanc) (citations omitted). “[T]he person of ordinary skillin the art is deemed to read the claim term not only in thecontext of the particular claim in which the disputed termappears, but in the context of the entire patent, includingthe specification.” Id. at 1313.The parties dispute the proper construction of twoclaim terms: “two insulated chambers” and “magneticcore.” Because the district court relied only on intrinsicevidence in its claim construction, we review its claimconstruction entirely de novo. [So the Teva decision is not at play here.]The issue on insulated chambers:The district…
↧