Legal Opinion
Sonix Technology Co., Ltd. v. Publications International
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided January 5, 2017No. 2016-1449PublishedCited by 220 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
Sonix Technology Co., Ltd. (“Sonix”) appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment following its determination that claims 9, 25, 35-36, 52-55, 57-60, 62-64, 66, 68, 71-77, 79-82, and 85-90 (“the asserted claims”) of Sonix’s U.S. Patent 7,328,845 (“the ’845 patent”) are invalid as indefinite. See Sonix Tech. Co. v. Publ’ns. Int’l, Ltd., No. 13-cv-2082, 2015 WL 8153600, at *9-17 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 8. 2015) (“Opinion”). Specifically, the district court concluded that the term “visually negligible” rendered the asserted claims indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Datamize, L.L.C. v. Plumtree Software, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Interval Licensing LLC v. Aol, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by220 opinions
- Berkheimer v. Hp Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- Exmark Manufacturing Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- Mentor Graphics Corporation v. Eve-Usa, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Niazi Licensing Corporation v. St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022
- Guangdong Alison Hi-Tech Co. v. ItcCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
215 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.