Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa North America Corp., Fico Cables, S.A., and Ficosa North America S.A. De C.V.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that \the number of embodiments disclosed in the specification is not determinative of the meaning of disputed claim terms\
• noting that a term can be limited or extended by the specification or prosecution history as long as the patentee clearly intended to do so
• explaining that “the number of embodiments disclosed in the specification is not determinative of the meaning of disputed claim terms”
• noting that the specification must include “clear statements of scope” that limit the claim term
• explaining that “[t]he words used in the claims are interpreted in light of the intrinsic evidence of record, including the written description”
• holding a patentee may define a claim term by implication, through the term’s consistent use throughout the specification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).