PALMER

v.

DEROBERTIS, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Pennwalt Corp. v. Durand-Wayland, Inc., 833 F.2d 931 (Fed. Cir. 1987)
  …rict court’s finding, that the Wells device does not infringe the Sonnenberg patent under the doctrine of equivalents, is not clearly erroneous. In Amstar Corp. v. Envirotech Corp., 730 F. 2d 1476, 1484, 221 USPQ 649, 655, (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 924, 105 S.Ct. 306, 83 L.Ed.2d 240 (1984), this court refused to “undermine the long-established legal principle that non-infringement is shown when an element or step in the claims is missing from the accused product or process.... ” Accord Panduit Cor…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044 (Fed. Cir. 1988)
• Tandon Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 831 F.2d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1987)
  …s commercial embodiments with the alleged infringing devices, rather than the correct procedure of applying the claims to the accused devices. Amstar Corp. v. Envirotech Corp., 730 F. 2d 1476, 1481-82, 221 USPQ 649, 653 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 924, 105 S.Ct. 306, 83 L.Ed.2d 240 (1984). The Commission, criticizing the AU for having made this error, explicitly disclaimed having based its final determination on a comparison of devices. The Commission’s finding is, on this record, adequately sup…