The Federal Circuit has recently expanded its doctrine concerning specification changes in family member patent applications. Minor alterations in the specification can now justify differing claim constructions, which poses challenges for patent attorneys. This ruling emphasizes the necessity for meticulous drafting, especially when crafting non-provisional applications that claim priority from a provisional. The implications of this ruling were highlighted in both FMC Corporation v. Sharda USA and the 2024 DDR case, where altered constructions ultimately disadvantaged the patent holders involved.
The Federal Circuit expanded its doctrine regarding specification changes in family member patent applications, allowing minor alterations to justify differing claim constructions.
In FMC Corporation v. Sharda USA, the recent ruling emphasizes the importance of maintaining careful drafting practices when claiming priority from provisional applications.
The case highlights that even minor specification changes can lead to claim construction outcomes that may disadvantage the patentee in patent litigation.
Both FMC and the 2024 DDR case demonstrate how differing claim interpretations arising from specification changes can negatively impact patent holders.
Collection
[
|
...
]