Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Expanded Means-Plus-Function Analysis Presents New Opportunities and Challenges
The Federal Circuit's en banc decision in Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015), expanded the potential application of 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6, making it more likely that functional claim language will be construed as a means-plus-function limitation even in the absence of the word “means.” Patent claims that recite functions in connection with nonce words like “module,” “mechanism,” “element,” “device,” or even “processor” are now more likely to be deemed means-plus-function limitations. Whether a claim term is or is not subject to §112, ¶6 may be dispositive in some patent cases. For example, the specification must disclose a structure or algorithm for performing the means-plus-function limitation, and if no such structure is disclosed, the claim will be held invalid as indefinite. Recent cases applying Williamson have reached different results, with some decisions finding claims subject to §112, ¶6 and invalid for lack of structure and other decisions finding software claim terms to recite structural limitations not subject to §112, ¶6. While most of the decisions to date have been in the computer-related arts, interesting parallels exist in the life sciences and pharmaceutical fields. Below, we discuss recent decisions applying Williamson and provide practical insights and strategies for patent owners and accused infringers to consider when addressing the expanded application of §112, ¶6.
Federal Circuit Changes Standard for Application Of §112, ¶6 in Williamson
Patent law generally does not permit purely functional claiming because this would allow a patent owner to obtain greater coverage without sufficiently describing the invention. Title 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6 provides an exception for “means-plus-function” claims. A claim limitation can be “expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure … in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure … described in the specification and equivalents thereof.” 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶6 (now renumbered §112(f)). Whether the word “means” is present in the claim is important. Use of the word “means” triggers a rebuttable presumption that §112, ¶6 applies; absence of the word “means” triggers the opposite rebuttable presumption. For more than a decade, the Federal Circuit characterized the presumption against application of §112, ¶6 when the word “means” is absent as a “strong one that is not readily overcome.” The court said it has “'seldom' held that a limitation without recitation of 'means' is a means-plus-function limitation” and refused to apply §112, ¶6 unless the claim “essentially is devoid of anything that can be construed as structure.” E.g., Lighting World, Inc. v. Birchwood Lighting, Inc., 382 F.3d 1354, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 757 F.3d 1286, 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Yachts, Jets, Horses & Hooch: Specialized Commercial Leasing Models
Defining commercial real estate asset class is essentially a property explaining how it identifies — not necessarily what its original intention was or what others think it ought to be. This article discusses, from a general issue-spot and contextual analysis perspective, how lawyers ought to think about specialized leasing formats and the regulatory backdrops that may inform what the documentation needs to contain for compliance purposes.
Hyperlinked Documents: The Latest e-Discovery Challenge
As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.
Identifying Your Practice's Differentiator
How to Convey Your Merits In a Way That Earns Trust, Clients and Distinctions Just as no two individuals have the exact same face, no two lawyers practice in their respective fields or serve clients in the exact same way. Think of this as a "Unique Value Proposition." Internal consideration about what you uniquely bring to your clients, colleagues, firm and industry can provide untold benefits for your law practice.
Risks and Ad Fraud Protection In Digital Advertising
The ever-evolving digital marketing landscape, coupled with the industry-wide adoption of programmatic advertising, poses a significant threat to the effectiveness and integrity of digital advertising campaigns. This article explores various risks to digital advertising from pixel stuffing and ad stacking to domain spoofing and bots. It will also explore what should be done to ensure ad fraud protection and improve effectiveness.
Turning Business Development Plans Into Reality
This article offers practical insights and best practices to navigate the path from roadmap to rainmaking, ensuring your business development efforts are not just sporadic bursts of activity, but an integrated part of your daily success.