December 6, 2021

Volume XI, Number 340

Advertisement
Advertisement

December 06, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

December 03, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

The Federal Circuit Rejects Infringement Arguments That Are Inconsistent with Prior Art Validity Arguments

In Commscope Techs. LLC v. Dali Wireless Inc., Nos. 2020-1817, 2020-1818 (Fed. Cir. August 24, 2021), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of JMOL of non-infringement and affirmed the denial of JMOL of invalidity of Dali’s U.S. Patent No. 9,031,521.

Dali accused CommScope’s FlexWave system of infringing the ’521 patent relating to wireless communications with portable equipment and handsets. The district construed “switching a controller off” as “[s]witching a controller to an off status.” The jury found infringement and no invalidity. Commscope appealed and Dali cross appealed.

The Federal Circuit held that Dali failed to preserve its challenge to the district court’s claim construction because it was relegated to a footnote. The Federal Circuit then reversed the finding of infringement, holding that Dali’s infringement argument conflicts with its validity arguments. The Federal Circuit held that Dali cannot simultaneously argue that the FlexWave system infringes by using a switch that is effectively nonoperating for a single power amplifier and that a prior art reference does not anticipate, given it has a switch that operates identically to select feedback from multiple power amplifiers. The Federal Circuit also concluded that Dali failed to argue infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.

Sneha Nyshadham, a law clerk with Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, also contributed to this article.

© 2021 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLPNational Law Review, Volume XI, Number 244
Advertisement

About this Author

Christina Ji-Hye Yang Patent Litigation Attorney Finnegan Law Firm Washington, DC
Associate

Christina Ji-Hye Yang focuses her practice on patent litigation and client counseling in the areas of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, with particular emphasis on Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) cases.

Christina is involved in all phases of litigation, including pre-litigation analysis, fact discovery, and expert discovery. She also has experience in Section 337 litigation at the International Trade Commission (ITC) and post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (PTAB), including inter partes reviews (IPRs). Christina has also advised clients in...

202-408-4465
Esther H. Lim Patent Litigation Attorney Finnegan Law Firm Washington, DC
Partner

Esther Lim has twenty-five years of experience in patent litigation, portfolio management, licensing, and counseling. She has litigated extensively before federal district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in complex matters involving a wide range of technologies from electrical to mechanical to pharmaceutical. Esther served as the founding managing partner of Finnegan’s Shanghai office. She is the past president of the D.C. Bar with 110,000 members.

Over two decades of diverse professional endeavors and...

202-408-4121
Elizabeth Ferrill Patent Attorney Finnegan Law Firm
Partner

Elizabeth Ferrill is an “undisputed expert on design patents” who is “always updated and enlightening others with her deep knowledge,” “very involved in the design bar,” and “gives her clients an outstanding service” as noted in Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000. She focuses her practice on all aspects of design patents, including prosecution, counseling, post-grant, and litigation.

Elizabeth counsels clients who hold design patents as well as those accused of infringement. She has experience with design patents related to consumer and industrial products, medical...

202 408 4445
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement