No. 13-369.

134 S.Ct. 2120 (2014)

189 L.Ed.2d 37


Supreme Court of United States.

Decided June 2, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John D. Vandenberg , Portland, OR, for Petitioner.

Mark D. Harris , New York, NY, for Respondent.

Curtis E. Gannon , for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of the Court, supporting the Respondent.

Thomas G. Hungar , Matthew D. McGill , Jonathan C. Bond , Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C., James E. Geringer , Jeffrey S. Love , John D. Vandenberg , Counsel of Record, Philip Warrick, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR, for Petitioner.

Sean M. Handler , Daniel C. Mulveny , Kessler, Topaz, Meltzer & Check LLP, Radnor, PA, Mark D. Harris , Counsel of Record, James H. Shalek , Celia V. Cohen , Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY, Steven M. Bauer , John E. Roberts , Anthony H. Cataldo , Jinnie Reed , Proskauer Rose LLP, Boston, MA, for Respondent.

Justice GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court.

The Patent Act requires that a patent specification "conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as [the] invention." 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 (2006 ed.) (emphasis added). This case, involving a heart-rate monitor used with exercise equipment, concerns the proper reading of the statute's clarity and precision demand...

Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases