Legal Opinion
Kcj Corporation v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc. And Kci Therapeutic Services, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided August 18, 2000No. 99-1248PublishedCited by 126 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
On summary judgment, the United States District Court for the District of Kansas ruled that Kinetic Concepts, Inc. and KCI Therapeutic Services, Inc. (collectively, Kinetic) did not infringe KCJ Corporation’s (KCJ’s) U.S. Patent No. 4,631,767 (’767 patent). See KCJ Corp. v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 39 F.Supp.2d 1286 (D.Kan.1999) (KCJ II). Because the district court correctly concluded as a matter of law that the claims at issue cannot cover the accused device, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, this court affirms.
I
KCJ is the assignee of the ’767 patent…
2Cases cited21 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
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by126 opinions
- Festo Corporation v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., A/K/A Smc Corporation, and Smc Pneumatics, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Altiris, Inc. v. Symantec Corp., Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Baldwin Graphic Systems, Inc. v. Siebert, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- The Gillette Company v. Energizer Holdings, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Astra Aktiebolag v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
121 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.