Legal Opinion
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided April 12, 2016No. 11-223CPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Patent Infringement; 28 U.S.C. § 1498; Claim Construction; Claim Differentiation; History Disclaimer; Indefiniteness; Prosecution 35 U.S.C. § 112.
SECOND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAMS, Judge.
This patent infringement case involves bags for the containment and disposal of bodily fluids. Plaintiff, American Innotek, Inc. (“American Innotek”), claims that the United States infringed United States Patent No. 5,116,139 entitled “Fluid Containment Bag” (the “ ’139 Patent”) by purchasing and using the accused product, a containment bag called the “Piddle Pak with Powder.” The accused…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- American Innotek, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Ross-Hime Designs, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- MIAMI-DADE COUNTY v. MIAMI GARDENS SQUARE ONE, INC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2020
- SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. RICONPHARMA LLCDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2022