This document discusses literal patent infringement. It defines literal infringement as when an accused product includes every element of a patent claim exactly as written. The document discusses the Markman v. Westview Instruments case where Markman had a patent on a dry cleaning inventory system and accused Westview of infringement. The jury found infringement but the trial and appeals courts found no infringement because the courts interpreted the term "inventory" in Markman's claims to only refer to articles of clothing, not Westview's system that tracked invoices. The Supreme Court affirmed looking first to intrinsic evidence to interpret claim terms.

1. GITAM INSTITUTE OF PHARMACY
Pharmaceutical Validation
LITERAL INFRINGEMENT
Submitted by
~ Mehul H Jain
M. Pharmacy I-I
Pharmaceutical Analysis

2. DEFINITION:
A patent is infringed if the accused product or process includes
every element exactly as recited in at least on of its claim.
Every word of a claim is used in a product, infringement is said to
be literal.
Thus, claims must be drafted and prosecuted with great care to
minimize the possibility of competitors who will literally infringe.

3. Markman V. Westview Instruments No. 95-26, 64
USLW 4263 (1996) [SC]
Facts:
Markman combined computer and bar code technology to minimize lost
garments and employee theft during the dry cleaning process.
The system developed was capable of monitoring and reporting the
status, location and movement of clothing in dry cleaning establishment.
The claimed invention allowed the detection of spurious additions to the
inventory as well as deletions there from.
Defendant system was capable of tracking invoice numbers, total prices
and receivables. (It did not track clothing)

4. Markman Cont…
Argument of Markman: Inventory included clothing and/or totals.
Argument of Defendant: Inventory meant clothing.
Jury: Defendant infringed Markman patent.
Trial Court: Not an infringement, because inventory referred
exclusively to articles of clothing and accused device merely
maintained a listing of invoices, it could not track the location of
individual garments as they moved about the shop and therefore
could not infringe.

5. Markman Cont…
Federal Circuit: (on appeal) affirmed the decision of trial court.
The court established two categories of evidentiary inputs for use in
claim interpretation.
I. Intrinsic Evidence: consist of claims, the specification and
prosecution history. Court were required to consider all intrinsic
evidences to determine meaning of claims.
II. Extrinsic Evidence: Dictionaries and expert testimony.
 Supreme Court: Affirmed the decision of federal court.

6. THANK YOU