Free
Message: Re: Collateral estoppel applied to claim limitation despite intervening reexaminatio

In e.Digital Corp. v. Futurewei Technologies, Inc., Nos. 14-1019, -1242, -1243 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2014), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s application of collateral estoppel to U.S. Patent No. 5,491,774 (“the ’774 patent”), reversed the district court’s application of collateral estoppel to unrelated U.S. Patent No. 5,839,108 (“the ’108 patent”), held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in converting a stipulated partial judgment into a final judgment, and remanded for further proceedings.

Dischion...when the public reads the initial head line they are not going to understand...as the unrelated consideration...... only has meaning to the folks on this board.

That is how readership is going to relate in reading the balance of the article.

There is nothing in the article that really translates 774 to 108….other than that word.

What the public sees, is that the patent 774 is dead...though it is not.

I'm not going to mention the word that seems to offend you.... however, that is what the author is praying on.

You have to read issues the way others are going to interpret and not the why you might. You have to put yourself in their shoes.

doni

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply