Young v. Lumenis, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a word of degree was definite, even without a numerical claim construction
• stating that a figure in the specification “provides a standard for measuring the meaning of the term ‘near,’ ” even without a numerical claim construction
• holding claim definite even though “the size of the appendage and the amount of skin required to be incised will vary from animal to animal based on the animal’s size”
• stating that indefiniteness is a determination of whether those skilled in the art would understand what is claimed based primarily on the intrinsic evidence, viz., the claim language, the specification, and the prosecution history
• reversing finding applicants’ statements to USPTO about prior art were material misstatements because they were “attorney argument[] attempting to distinguish the claims from the prior art, not gross mischaracterizations or unreasonable interpretations”
• rejecting an indefiniteness challenge to the term “near” even though “the size of the appendage and the amount of skin required to be incised will vary from animal to animal” because “a person having ordinary skill in the art would know where to make the cut”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

60 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Interval Licensing LLC v. Aol, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2014-09-10· cited 213×
• Innogenetics, N v. v. Abbott Laboratories
  Federal Circuit· 2008-01-17· cited 199×
• Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Applera Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-03-26· cited 136×
• Perfect Web Technologies, Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2009-12-02· cited 100×
• Power-One, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-03-30· cited 92×
• Scanner Technologies Corp. v. Icos Vision Systems Corporation N.V.
  Federal Circuit· 2008-06-19· cited 87×
• Spine Solutions, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-09-09· cited 72×
• Ultimax Cement Manufacturing Corp. v. CTS Cement Manufacturing Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2009-12-03· cited 67×
• Larson Manufacturing Co. of South Dakota, Inc. v. Aluminart Products Ltd.
  Federal Circuit· 2009-03-18· cited 65×
• Rothman v. Target Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2009-02-13· cited 56×
• TriMed, Inc. v. Stryker Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-06-09· cited 51×
• Green Edge Enterprises, LLC v. Rubber Mulch Etc., LLC
  Federal Circuit· 2010-09-07· cited 48×
• American Piledriving Equipment, Inc. v. Geoquip, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-03-21· cited 47×
• Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. v. Alpine Electronics of America, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-06-18· cited 38×
• Xitronix Corporation v. KLA-Tencor Corporation
  Fifth Circuit· 2019-02-15· cited 25×
• Baseload Energy, Inc. v. Roberts
  Federal Circuit· 2010-09-09· cited 22×
• Hearing Components, Inc. v. Shure Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-04-01· cited 20×
• Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-01-25· cited 18×
• Solvay S.A. v. Honeywell International, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-10-13· cited 17×
• Taltech Ltd. v. Esquel Enterprises Ltd.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-05-12· cited 13×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
• Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 2006-02-21· cited 3,273×
• Molins Plc, and John Coventry Smith, Jr. v. Textron, Inc., Kearney & Trecker Corporation, and Avco Corporation
  Federal Circuit· 1995-03-15· cited 461×
• Amgen, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., and Genetics Institute, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1991-05-20· cited 256×
• Datamize, L.L.C. v. Plumtree Software, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2005-08-05· cited 220×
• J.P. Stevens & Co., Inc. v. Lex Tex Ltd., Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1984-11-09· cited 179×
• Rodime Plc v. Seagate Technology, Inc., Defendant-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 1999-06-03· cited 159×
• Ak Steel Corporation v. Sollac and Ugine, Defendants-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 2003-09-23· cited 137×
• Rohm and Haas Company v. Crystal Chemical Company and Joe C. Eller
  Federal Circuit· 1983-12-07· cited 113×
• M. Eagles Tool Warehouse, Inc. v. Fisher Tooling Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2006-02-27· cited 57×
• Intellectual Property Development, Inc. And Communications Patents, Ltd. v. Ua-Columbia Cablevision of Westchester, Inc. And Tele-Communications, Inc.
  D.C. Circuit· 2003-08-15· cited 49×

Other cases named Young v. Lumenis, Inc.

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Young v. Lumenis, Inc.
  S.D. Ohio· 2004-01-26· cited 2×
• Young v. Lumenis, Inc.
  S.D. Ohio· 2004-10-19
• Young v. Lumenis, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2004-06-09