CAFC Affirms ITC Enablement Ruling Under ‘Infrequently Applied’ Anderson Test

On April 20, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that FS.com v. International Trade Commission Affirms the ITC’s determination that fiber optic cable distributor FS.com has violated 19 USC § 1337 by importing goods that infringe a patent claim owned by Corning Optical Communications. This relatively brief Federal Circuit decision dealt primarily with the feasibility debate of FS.com on appeal, and the Court of Appeals held that a skilled engineer would have discretion over fiber optic connection density. After determining that you would understand that the allegation has an inherent cap, we dismissed the allegation.

Section 337 proceedings lead to CDO for FS.com fiber optic imports

Corning’s Section 337 complaint alleges that FS.com infringed Corning’s patent by importing high-density fiber optic equipment into the United States for sale. Of his four patents originally claimed by Corning, the ITC rejected FS.com’s claim that two of his patent claims were not fully validated under 35 USC §112. : US Patent No. 9020320, High density and bandwidth fiber optic apparatus and related apparatus and methodsand U.S. Pat. No. 8,712,206, High density fiber optic modules and module housings and related equipmentBoth patents relate to fiber optic technology commonly used in data centers, and the ‘320 patent describes a chassis housing fiber optic equipment supporting a “fiber density of at least 98 fiber optic connections per U space.” claims. After discovering the Section 337 violation, the ITC entered a cease and desist order (CDO) against his importation of FS.com’s accused product.

On appeal, FS.com updated the above claim language and lack of enablement argument to another claim in the ‘320 patent that recites “at least 144 fiber optic connections per U space.” The plain and ordinary meaning of “U space”, as interpreted by the Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) doing Section 337 research at the ITC, is 19 inches or 23 inches. Because the claim language is open-ended, FS.com argued that the challenged claims were not valid for a specification that disclosed only a chassis supporting up to 144 fiber optic connections.

Open-ended claims with inherent upper bounds can be enabled with Anderson

The Federal Circuit has reconsidered the ITC’s analysis of FS.com’s enablement claim based on the two-step test established by the 2007 Court of Appeals ruling. Anderson Corp. v. Fiber Composites LLCThe Court of Appeal has Anderson While testing is rarely applied, both FS.com and Corning have agreed that testing will govern their legal disputes. Anderson,”[o]Pen-end claims are not inherently irrelevant,” and “If there are inherent caps, which are not known with certainty, they may be supported. and Specifications allow those skilled in the art to approach that limit. ” (emphasis added)

FS.com’s appeal focuses on the bare statement in the ITC’s Section 337 ruling that Corning’s fiber optic chassis claims “exist in some inherent limitation,” and specifically sets out the upper limit. I never made it clear. However, the Federal Circuit found that as of the ‘320 patent’s priority date of August 2008, there was no substantial evidence supporting the ITC’s finding that a density of more than 144 fiber optic connections per U space was technically infeasible. found evidence. The written description of the ‘320 patent includes a table disclosing 144 fiber optic connections as the maximum achievable density for Lucent Connector Type (LC) simplex and duplex adapters as of the priority date. FS.com presented evidence of a mini-duplex connector type (MDC) duplex adapter capable of achieving densities of up to 432 connections per U-space, but no such adapter was developed until 2019 and 8 in 2008. You have not proven that it has not been activated as of the priority of the month. date, held by the Federal Circuit.

The ITC’s finding that the ‘320 patent’s claims are valid was also supported by expert testimony provided by Corning during the Section 337 proceedings. Corning experts have confirmed that an LC-type adapter can support more than 144 fiber optic connections when used in combination with another adapter, but a commercial product using only LC-type adapters can support more than 144 fiber optic connections. He further testified that none had been able to achieve fiber optic connections.

CAFC Confirms Claim Construction Including Multiple Module Front Openings

The Federal Circuit also dismissed FS.com’s appeal of ITC’s construction of the claim term “front opening” from claim 14 of Corning’s ‘206 patent, which recites a fiber optic module. FS.com argued that its claims were limited to a single front opening, thereby allowing its proprietary multiple opening module to avoid Corning’s allegations of infringement under claim 14. rice field. However, the Federal Circuit held that the multiple “front opening” statements in the unasserted claims of the ‘206 patent indicated the patentee’s clear intent to limit claim 14 to a single module opening. Is not … Further, a drawing accompanying the specification of the ‘206 patent shows a front opening divided into multiple openings, giving the Court of Appeals “a “front opening” encompasses one or more openings.” There is no reason to deviate from the general rule that

Image Source: Deposit Photo
Image ID: 103763568
Copyright: bigfatnapoleon;