Filed under: Case Updates | 1 April, 2011 | by GHollis

Decided: March  21, 2011

American Piledriving brought patent infringement claims against Geoquip for allegedly infringing its vibratory assembly patent. The prosecution history in this matter involved claim construction and infringement issues common to seven separate law-suits in the Eastern District of Virginia and Northern District of California.  In its holding, the CAFC consolidated American Piledriving’s appeals from both districts; the prior ruling in both districts granted summary judgment in favor of Geoquip for noninfirngment. 

As a part of its appeal, American Piledriving argued that the prior district courts’ ruling misconstrued three terms in American Piledriving’s patent.  In the current ruling, the CAFC construed the claims and clarified the terms-at-issue from both districts’ prior rulings.  The Court affirmed the claim construction from the Eastern District of Virginia and modified the claim construction from the Northern district of California.  The CAFC evaluated the patent infringement claims of American Piledriving.  Using its claim constructions, the CAFC affirmed both district court rulings that granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Geoquip. Officially, the CAFC affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  Due to the modification of the claim construction, the court affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded the judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of California.

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/10-1283.pdf