Laryngeal Mask Co. Ltd. v. Ambu

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to limit claims to what is thought to be the invention contemplated by the inventors
• declining to limit claims to what is thought to be the invention contemplated by the inventors
• “The applicant deleted this requirement from the claims. . . . Regardless of why LMA amended its claims, we agree with LMA that it would be improper to read [that re- quirement] back into the [claim].”
• “[D]efendant’s insistence upon this court’s reading back into the claims limitations which were originally there and were removed during prosecution of the application through the Patent Office cannot be permitted.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).