In DoggyPhone LLC v. Tomofun LLC, the Federal Circuit ruled that Tomofun's Furbo device did not infringe DoggyPhone's patent due to the lack of transmission beginning from pet activity.
The court clarified that the patent claim requires the pet's activity to initiate the transmission of video or audio, rather than merely causing it.
Summary judgment was entered based on the finding that there was no genuine dispute regarding the material facts needed to support DoggyPhone's infringement allegations.
The decision emphasized specific structural requirements in the patent that the Furbo device did not meet, notably the lack of a food dispenser and required transmission features.
Collection
[
|
...
]