Atlantic Thermoplastics Co., Inc., James B. Sullivan and Richard B. Fox v. Faytex Corporation, Defendant/cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the process steps do serve as claim limitations – a product made by a different process than that claimed in the patent’s product-by-process claim is not covered by the patent
• explaining that, in BASF, the validity rule “focused on the product with less regard for the process limits”
• “An accused infringer can avoid infringement by showing that the accused device lacks even a single claim limitation.”
• “A decision that fails to consider Supreme Court precedent does not control if the court determines that the prior panel would have reached a different conclusion if it had considered controlling precedent.”
• “A decision that fails to consider Supreme Court precedent does not con- trol if the court determines that the prior panel would have UNITED STATES v. CONTRERAS 13495 reached a different conclusion if it had considered controlling precedent”
• discussing each of these cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).