Hocus Pocus

Back in September 2009 in the case of Nystrom v. TREX, Chief Judge Rader wrote an opinion (or “additonal views” at the end of an opinion that he authored for the panel) that addressed claim vitiation.  See the previous posts here: [Vitiation Part I] [Vitiation Part II].

In another oral argument from 2007 in Wleklinski v. Targus, 2007-1273 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 19, 2007), Judge Rader commented on the Federal Circuit’s treatment of claim vitiation and the related “hocus pocus” that makes it a legal issue that can therefore be handled under summary judgment:  [Listen]. 

You can read the Targus opinion here: [Read].

You can listen to the entire oral argument here:  [Listen].

One Response to “Hocus Pocus”

  1. [...] comments from the bench in past cases.  See these posts for past comments by Chief Judge Rader. [Link], [Link], and [...]