Plaintiffs allege infringement of Patent No. 7,356,152 directed to a device for mounting accessories onto firearms. In this straight-to-the-point claim construction order, Judge Ponsor mostly sides with the plaintiffs on issues relating to how narrowly to construe the mechanical terms of the patent (e.g. “parallel to,” “longitudinal axis,” etc.). Some highlights:
- Use of the term “substantially” does not render the claim indefinite.
- The claim term “clamping device” was sufficiently structural to avoid a means-plus-function construction.
- The court declined to rule on whether the terms “firearm” or “firearm accessory” in claim 1 were affirmative limitations affecting the scope of the patent noting that “a claim construction proceeding is not the correct context in which to address the breadth of a patent.”
Samson Mfg. Corp. v. Austin Precision Prods., Inc., 09-30027-MAP (June 29, 2010)
Comments