Legal Opinion
Pieczenik v. Dyax Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided September 23, 2003No. 03-1302PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
On summary judgment, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts determined that Dyax Corp. did not infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 4,359,535 (the ’535 patent), 4,528,2661 (the ’266 patent), and 5,866,363 (the ’363 patent). Pieczenik v. Dyax Corp., 226 F.Supp.2d 314 (D.Mass.2002); Pieczenik v. Dyax Corp., Civ. Action No. 00-11370-RGS, 2003 WL 1562239 (D.Mass. Feb. 25, 2003). This court affirms.
I
In its Markman ruling, the district court construed two phrases appearing only in the ’363 patent: “from about 4 to about 12” and “at least about 10% of all…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- 10X Genomics, Inc. v. Parse Biosciences, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2024
- Pieczenik v. Dyax CorpSupreme Court of the United States · 2004