Plaintiff was not unreasonable in pursuing its infringement claims even though plaintiff's pre-filing testing indicated that defendants' accused product did not satisfy the "specific for" limitation found in each asserted claim. "[B]efore any claim construction by the Court, and certainly before the suit was filed, the meaning of 'specific for' and the interfering PTH fragment claims limitations that [plaintiff] used as a basis for an allegation of infringement was not unreasonable."
Scantibodies Laboratory Inc v. Immutopics Inc et al., 2-04-cv-08871
(CACD July 6, 2009, Order) (Pfaelzer, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment