Romero v. Shih

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the “store-and-execute” spacecraft did not literally infringe the Williams patent because they did not send an indication of the instantaneous spin angle to the ground
• an amendment to a claim may “have a limiting effect within a spectrum ranging from great to small to zero”
• “An applicant for patent ... is not required to predict all future developments which enable the practice of his invention in substantially the same way.”
• Prosecution history estoppel “applies to claim amendments to overcome rejections based on prior art ... and to arguments submitted to obtain the patent.”
• “The doctrine of equivalents comes into play only when actual literal infringement is not present.”
• prosecution history estoppel applies to arguments made to examiner to obtain patent as well as to claim amendments made to overcome rejections based on prior art

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).