Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 24 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Default Proof Credit Card System, Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Default Proof Credit Card System, Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. Anchor | green | “the testimony of one of ordinary skill in the art cannot supplant the total absence of structure from the specification.” | 13 |
| 2 | Medical Instrumentation and Diagnostics Corporation v. Elekta Ab, Elekta Instrument Ab, Elekta Instruments, Inc., and Elekta Oncology Systems, Inc. | green | “if the specification is not clear as to the structure that the patentee intends to correspond to the claimed function, then the patentee has not paid the price but is rather attempting to claim in functional terms unbounded by any reference to structure in the specification.” | 11 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.