""Brita cannot use the knowledge of a skilled artisan to make up for the specification's lack of disclosure as to non-carbon-block filters that can meet the claimed FRAP factor." - CAFC The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Wednesday issued a precedential decision in Brita LP v. International Trade Commission, affirming the International Trade Commission's (ITC's) finding that claims of a Brita patent for a water"
"The case originated from a complaint Brita LP filed at the ITCunder Section 337 of the Tariff Act, alleging that Vestergaard Frandsen Inc., Kaz USA, Inc., and Helen of Troy Limited infringed its U.S. Patent No. 8,167,141. While an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) initially found a violation, the Commission reversed the decision, finding the claims invalid, which prompted Brita's appeal."
The Federal Circuit affirmed the International Trade Commission's finding that claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,167,141 are invalid for inadequate written description and lack of enablement. Brita filed a Section 337 complaint alleging infringement by Vestergaard Frandsen, Kaz USA, and Helen of Troy. An Administrative Law Judge initially found a violation, but the Commission reversed and found the claims invalid, prompting appeal. The '141 patent covers gravity flow filtration with claim 1 requiring activated carbon, a lead scavenger, and a FRAP factor of about 350 or less. The specification named carbon blocks and mixed media but did not adequately disclose non-carbon-block filters able to meet the FRAP factor. The court found substantial evidence supporting the Commission's conclusion. The opinion was authored by Judge Prost and joined by Judges Reyna and Chen.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]