Toro v. Deere (Fed. Cir. 2004)

January 22, 2004 on 10:12 am | In Caselaw |

The Toro Company v. Deere and Company
Jan. 20, 2003

Holding snippet:
“Because the district court did not construe the ’168 patent and did not properly analyze inherent anticipation, and because the district court improperly foreclosed Deere from litigating its other invalidity defenses, we vacate the district court’s holding that the ’168 patent is “valid” and the stipulated final judgment of validity of the ’168 patent. We do, however, affirm the denial of summary judgment of invalidity for anticipation and the grant of summary judgment of infringement of the ’168 patent. On Toro’s cross-appeal, we affirm the district court’s summary judgments of noninfringement of the ’744 and ’745 patents. We remand for further proceedings on claim construction, anticipation, and Deere’s other invalidity defenses with respect to the ’168 patent.”

Copy of the case (self executing zip file) HERE

Better summary on the IPO site.

 Print This Post |  Email This Post | | Subscribe via e-mail

Related Posts:

• International Rectifier Corp. v. Ixys Corp. (Fed. Cir.)
• Nystrom v. Trex Company, Inc. et al. (Fed. Cir.)
• Federal Circuit Update (September 13, 2004)