Legal Opinion
Young v. Lumenis, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided June 27, 2007No. 2006-1455PublishedCited by 91 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
William P. Young appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio holding that claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent 6,502,579 (the “'579 patent”) are invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 and the summary judgment that the '579 patent is unenforceable by reason of inequitable conduct. Young v. Lumenis, Inc., No. 2:03-CV-655 (S.D.Ohio Nov. 1, 2005) (Indefiniteness Order); Young v. Lumenis, Inc., No. 2:03-CV-655 (S.D.Ohio Mar. 28, 2006) (Inequitable Conduct Order). Because we conclude that the term “near” is not indefinite, we…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Molins Plc, and John Coventry Smith, Jr. v. Textron, Inc., Kearney & Trecker Corporation, and Avco CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Amgen, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., and Genetics Institute, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Datamize, L.L.C. v. Plumtree Software, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- Interval Licensing LLC v. Aol, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Innogenetics, N v. v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Applera Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Power-One, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Perfect Web Technologies, Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.