The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Of Claims In Reexamination: A Standard Making It Easier to Invalidate Patent Claims

Bloomberg Law Reports: Intellectual Property
October 11, 2010

Larry Stahl and Don Heckenberg’s article, “The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Of Claims In Reexamination: A Standard Making It Easier to Invalidate Patent Claims,” appeared in the October 11th issue of Bloomberg Law Reports: Intellectual Property. One of the most important factors that parties will consider when comparing a patent challenge in a federal court to a reexamination proceeding in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is the different way claim terminology is construed in the two forums. The USPTO construes claim language by applying a broader standard than a federal court. This article explores the differences between claim construction in a federal court during civil litigation and the USPTO during a reexamination proceeding, and analyzes the corresponding effects of those differences in challenges to the validity of patent claims.

View Attachment (PDF)