About: LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc.

An Entity of Type: Abstraction100002137, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Lizardtech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005), LizardTech sued (ERM) for patent infringement related to taking discrete wavelet transforms (DWTs) in their ER Mapper program. The court ruled in ERM's favor, finding that some of the claims were invalid, and that ER Mapper did not infringe the other claims. The case has been viewed as an example of the "written description doctrine" which courts may use when applying 35 U.S.C. § 112 to decide the validity of patent claims.

Property	Value
dbo:abstract	Lizardtech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005), LizardTech sued (ERM) for patent infringement related to taking discrete wavelet transforms (DWTs) in their ER Mapper program. The court ruled in ERM's favor, finding that some of the claims were invalid, and that ER Mapper did not infringe the other claims. The case has been viewed as an example of the "written description doctrine" which courts may use when applying 35 U.S.C. § 112 to decide the validity of patent claims. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink	https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/424/1336/484689/ https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case%3Fcase=14230375137700298214 https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/211648/lizardtech-v-earth-resource-mapping/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US5710835%3Foq=patent+5710835
dbo:wikiPageID	33471132 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength	9703 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID	1054823771 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink	dbr:Primary_memory dbr:Algorithm dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Washington dbr:University_of_California dbr:Patent_infringement dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Appeal dbr:Patent dbr:William_Curtis_Bryson dbr:Claim_(patent) dbr:Alan_David_Lourie dbr:Alvin_Anthony_Schall dbr:Extensis dbr:Digital_artifact dbr:Digital_image dbr:Discrete_wavelet_transform dbr:Remand_(court_procedure) dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit_cases dbc:United_States_patent_case_law dbr:Title_35_of_the_United_States_Code dbr:Phillips_v._AWH_Corp. dbr:Pixels dbr:Special_master dbr:Prior_art dbr:LizardTech dbr:Summary_judgement dbr:W.D._Wash. dbr:F.3d dbr:F._App'x dbr:U.S.P.Q.2d dbr:Earth_Resource_Mapping
dbp:case	25920.0
dbp:citations	17280.0
dbp:court	dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit
dbp:courtlistener	https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/211648/lizardtech-v-earth-resource-mapping/
dbp:decidedate	0001-10-04 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear	2005 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname	Lizardtech, Inc. and Regents of the University of California v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc. and Earth Resource Mapping Pty Ltd. (en)
dbp:googlescholar	https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case%3Fcase=14230375137700298214
dbp:joinmajority	a unanimous panel (en)
dbp:judges	dbr:William_Curtis_Bryson dbr:Alan_David_Lourie dbr:Alvin_Anthony_Schall
dbp:justia	https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/424/1336/484689/
dbp:litigants	Lizardtech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc. (en)
dbp:majority	Bryson (en)
dbp:prior	Finding for Defendant, LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc., No. C99-1602C, 2000 WL 34502412 ; reversed and remanded, 35 F. App'x 918 . (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Infobox_COA_case dbt:Reflist dbt:USC
dcterms:subject	dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit_cases dbc:United_States_patent_case_law
rdf:type	yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity
rdfs:comment	Lizardtech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005), LizardTech sued (ERM) for patent infringement related to taking discrete wavelet transforms (DWTs) in their ER Mapper program. The court ruled in ERM's favor, finding that some of the claims were invalid, and that ER Mapper did not infringe the other claims. The case has been viewed as an example of the "written description doctrine" which courts may use when applying 35 U.S.C. § 112 to decide the validity of patent claims. (en)
rdfs:label	LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc. (en)
owl:sameAs	freebase:LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc. wikidata:LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc. https://global.dbpedia.org/id/4qcgy
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:LizardTech,_Inc._v._Earth_Resource_Mapping,_Inc.?oldid=1054823771&ns=0
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:LizardTech,_Inc._v._Earth_Resource_Mapping,_Inc.
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of	dbr:List_of_United_States_patent_law_cases dbr:Extensis
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:LizardTech,_Inc._v._Earth_Resource_Mapping,_Inc.