Innova/pure Water, Inc. v. Safari Water Filtration Systems, Inc. (Doing Business as Safari Outdoor Products)

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 claims are not “presumed” to be restricted to the embodiments disclosed in the specification
• holding that the claims are not “presumed” to be restricted to the embodiments disclosed in the specification
• concluding that the facts presented “simply a case where the patentee used different words to express similar concepts, even though it maybe be confusing drafting practice.”
• explaining that “particular embodiments. appearing in the written description will not be used to limit claim language that has broader effect’’
• stating that “[p]articular embodiments appearing in the written description will not be used to limit claim language that has a broader effect”
• stating that “[particular embodiments appearing in the written description will not be used to limit claim language that has a broader effect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).