dbo:abstract
|
- Festo Corp. v Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 535 U.S. 722 (2002), was a United States Supreme Court decision in the area of patent law that examined the relationship between the doctrine of equivalents (which holds that a patent can be infringed by something that is not literally falling within the scope of the claims because a somewhat insubstantial feature or element has been substituted) and the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel (which holds that a party who makes a change to a patent application to accommodate the requirements of patent law cannot claim infringement by equivalents of an element that was narrowed by that change). (en)
|
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
dbo:wikiPageID
| |
dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 8194 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
dbp:arguedate
|
- 0001-01-08 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
dbp:argueyear
| |
dbp:case
|
- Festo Corp. v Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., (en)
|
dbp:cornell
| |
dbp:courtlistener
| |
dbp:decidedate
|
- 0001-05-28 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
dbp:decideyear
| |
dbp:findlaw
| |
dbp:fullname
|
- Festo Corporation, Petitioner v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Company, Ltd., et al. (en)
|
dbp:googlescholar
| |
dbp:holding
|
- Claim amendments must be examined in context of the prosecution history and do not necessarily bar assertions under the Doctrine of Equivalents due to prosecution history estoppel. Judgment of the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded. (en)
|
dbp:joinmajority
| |
dbp:justia
| |
dbp:lawsapplied
|
- U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 8.; 35 U.S.C. §112 (en)
|
dbp:litigants
|
- Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. (en)
|
dbp:loc
| |
dbp:majority
| |
dbp:oyez
| |
dbp:parallelcitations
| |
dbp:prior
| |
dbp:subsequent
| |
dbp:uspage
| |
dbp:usvol
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
dcterms:subject
| |
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:comment
|
- Festo Corp. v Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 535 U.S. 722 (2002), was a United States Supreme Court decision in the area of patent law that examined the relationship between the doctrine of equivalents (which holds that a patent can be infringed by something that is not literally falling within the scope of the claims because a somewhat insubstantial feature or element has been substituted) and the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel (which holds that a party who makes a change to a patent application to accommodate the requirements of patent law cannot claim infringement by equivalents of an element that was narrowed by that change). (en)
|
rdfs:label
|
- Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. (en)
|
owl:sameAs
| |
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
foaf:name
|
- (en)
- Festo Corporation, Petitioner v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Company, Ltd., et al. (en)
|
is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates
of | |
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |