Claim Construction in Patent Infringement Analysis: A Case Study of the U.S. Federal Courts’ Decisions
|關鍵字:||專利侵害;申請專利範圍解釋;美國聯邦巡迴上訴法院;馬克曼聽證;Patent Infringement;Claim Construction;Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit;Markman Hearing|
為了維持將專利權範圍類比成不動產，專利的申請專利範圍之邊界就如同發明的「土地疆界（metes and bounds）」一般，以達到告知社會大眾有關專利權人可排除他人的權利範圍之公示（public notice）功能。在我國的專利法制中，解釋申請專利範圍之發展歷程較短，未有較深入的研究與分析。又，我國專利訴訟案件對侵害判斷理論發展仍以既受外國實務與學說為主，特別是專利訴訟案件最多以及判決相關資料最充分公開之美國聯邦法院判決實務，真正有針對爭議焦點清楚論述判決理由之案件亦不多，實有必要藉由外國法對解釋申請專利範圍的發展過程來瞭解申請專利範圍解釋之本質、內容以及其適用方式。
A patent is a statutorily-created right, it allows a person, upon making a showing to the government that he has originated a novel innovation in the useful arts, to exclude others from exploiting his invention (called an infringement) for a period of years. The patent creates a property right, and is treated in law as intangible personal property. To evidence this right, a patent is memorialized by a document called a letters patent. Its scope is described in the claims of the patent document (called the specification), upon granting to function like a deed to real property in that it describes the metes and bounds of the property as to which the owner has the right to exclude others. Claims also serves a notice function to the public. Patent claims are subject to many technical rules, as well as historical styles, so they often take a formalistic and sometimes stilted form. Nonetheless, the claims determine what exactly the patent owner may exclude others from doing. Given the great impact claim construction may have on the outcome of a patent infringement case, the court's construction of the claims of a patent may be case dispositive or drastically affect the prospect of settlement. Thus, while not technically a dispositive ruling, claim construction can have outcome-determinative effects. The purpose of this thesis is to study the methodology of patent claim construction for those called upon to construe the claims of a patent, that is, to determine the meaning of patent claims. The procedure and manner for construing claims can vary depending on the court, the facts and issues in the case, and personal preferences. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit of the United States has provided some guidance, however, as to permissible and impermissible claim construction procedures. This thesis study those procedures and underlying issues in dual approaches of history review and case study.
|Appears in Collections:||Thesis|
Files in This Item:
If it is a zip file, please download the file and unzip it, then open index.html in a browser to view the full text content.