Deere & Co. v. Bush Hog, LLC

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 preamble phrase “rotary cutter deck” was a limitation where the specification referred to “the present invention” as “a rotary cutter deck”
• concluding that the phrase “rotary cutter deck” in a preamble was limiting when “[t]he title of the patent, the summary of the invention, and every drawing describe invention as a deck for a rotary cutter”
• finding that preamble phrase “rotary cutter deck” was a limitation where the specification referred to “the present invention” as a “rotary cutter deck”
• concluding “rotary cutter deck” in the pre- amble informed the meaning of the “torsional stiffness” limitation
• cautioning that “a claim construction must not import limitations from the specification into the claims”
• explaining that, inter alia, the claim term must be read in the context of the specification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).