The Patent Shoppe
  • Home
  • Firm Information
    • Areas of Practice
    • Firm Philosophy
    • Services and Pricing
  • Personnel
    • Patrick J. Lavender
  • Insight
  • Links
  • Contact Us

What is the Festo doctrine?

5/29/2017

 
Festo (or more specifically, the U.S. Supreme Court case entitled Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 535 U.S. 722 (2002) sets out the rule for when the patentee will be deemed to have surrendered equivalents as a result of earlier making a narrowing amendment.  The rule is essentially as follows:

A court will first presume that any narrowing amendment offered during prosecution was occasioned by a "substantial reason related to patentability."  The burden will be on the patent owner to rebut that presumption by showing that the amendment had another explanation sufficient to overcome prosecution history estoppel.  Applicant may rebut this presumption with evidence showing that it was a "truly cosmetic" amendment,  or a "clarifying amendment," or otherwise an amendment with no real  impact on the scope of the claim.  

But if the amendment was, in fact, related to patentability, the patentee then "bear[s] the burden of showing that the amendment [did] not surrender the particular equivalent in question."  If the patentee cannot meet that burden, a court will presume that the patentee gave up, irretrievably, all of the subject matter excluded from the claim due to the amendment.

Comments are closed.

    Insight
    ( Official Blog )

    RSS Feed

© COPYRIGHT 2015, THE PATENT SHOPPE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS WEBSITE IS PUBLISHED BY THE LAW FIRM THE PATENT SHOPPE. ITS CONTENTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO SERVE AS LEGAL ADVICE OR LEGAL OPINION. SUCH ADVICE MAY ONLY BE PROVIDED WHEN RELATED TO SPECIFIC FACT SITUATIONS THAT THE PATENT SHOPPE HAS BEEN RETAINED AS COUNSEL TO ADDRESS.