The element-by-element approach to claim construction proposed by defendant, while perhaps not specifically proscribed, invites the kind of myopic, restrictive approach to the infringement analysis which the Federal Circuit has found to be “untethered from the ordinary observer inquiry” and therefore error. Ethicon, 796 F.3d at 1335 (citing Amini Innovation Corp. v. Anthony Cal., Inc., 439 F.3d 1365 (Fed Cir. 2006) ). See Egyptian Goddess, 543 F.3d at 680 (admonishing district courts to “recognize the risk” of a verbal description that may place undue emphasis on certain features in lieu of the design as a whole”). This case arises out of the alleged infringement by the defendant hyper bike (“Hyper” or “the defendant”) of two design patents held by the plaintiff, Fa-Hsing Lu (“the plaintiff”).
It observes that the Federal Circuit in Egyptian Goddess stated that it may be helpful for the court to point out various features of the claimed design as they relate to the accused design and the prior art. 543 F.3d at 680. It then cites Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Dolgencorp, LLC, a case in which the Federal Circuit, reviewing the verbal construction of a design patent, approvingly concluded that the lower court had followed the Egyptian Goddess standard “to a tee”. Defendant submits that Lanard controls the present case, or at least provides more authoritative guidance than DePaoli and Reddy.
Defendant argues for a verbal construction but plaintiff contends that illustrations will suffice. “To be back with Hyper is a great opportunity that I’m very excited about to, say the least,”said E.C.. “To be handed the keys to the castle with the task of building a high end line of mountain bikes for the Hyper brand is both a big responsibility and honor. I will still be on the bike at all scheduled events but my role will be more directed toward educating riders about our products and growing the brand at a grass roots level, rather than focusing solely on results”.
Because the proverbial picture is worth one thousand words, the Court attaches a demonstrative example of each claimed design. In analyzing a patent infringement action, the Court must 1) determine the meaning and scope of the patent claims asserted to be infringed and 2) compare the properly construed claims to the infringing device. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 976 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (en banc), aff’d, 517 U.S. 370, 116 S.Ct.
What are your thoughts on the cost of bikes and do you think that things have gone too far? If you are in the market for a new bike or anything else cycling-related make sure to head over to our dedicated buying guide page for all the information you could possibly need. Ultimately as consumers, we have the ability to vote with our money on what we are willing to buy and how hyper bicycles much we are willing to pay for it. Although the rising cost of superbikes does not directly affect most of us, they do appear to be dragging the prices of lower-spec bikes up with them too. Motorbikes, on the other hand, have reached something of a plateau in terms of big step changes in development. A motorbike made in 2023 is going to be very similar to one made in 2003.
Surly is a leading manufacturer of bicycle frames, and was one of the first Fat Bike manufacturers. “At Salsa, we believe a sense of adventure makes life better. The bicycle can be so much more than just a bike; it’s a path to new places, new people, and amazing experiences.” No surprises, just great bikes that you can pay off with as low as 0% APR financing from Affirm on select bikes. The first rider-owned company, SE Racing, becomes a major force in the BMX industry thanks to Scott Breithaupt. Get holiday season strategies, insights, and expert advice to maximize your ROI.