Burke, Inc. v. Bruno Independent Living Aids, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that limitations included in the specification, including functional limitations, cannot be imported into the claims where no such limitations exist in the claims
• holding that “the interest of consistency” encouraged courts to consider nonprecedential orders for claim constructions of the same claims and patents at issue
• “Summary judgment should ordinarily be vacated or reversed, however, if it is based on a claim construction that this court determines to be erroneous.”
• “an attribute of the preferred embodiment cannot be read into the claim as a limitation.”
• \[A]n attribute of the preferred embodiment cannot be read into the claim as a limitation.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).