Delaware Judge Refuses to Construe Disputed Terms of "Academic Interest"
Posted In: Kent A. Jordan on October 27, 2006 By Andrew A. Lundgren
Is there a limit to the number of claims a district court will construe? Yesterday, a Delaware District Judge issued a claim construction opinion addressing that question. The Court, faced with the prospect of interpreting ninety-nine claim terms, sua sponte limited the scope of its opinion:
While a general interest in the terms of the patent is understandable, I cannot, consistent with my judicial responsibilities, answer questions that may be of no more than academic interest. Therefore, I have endeavored to construe only those terms that, based on the papers submitted, appear to be dispositive of issues brought to my attention.
<%media(20061027-Ampex.pdf|Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co., C.A. No. 04-1373-KAJ (D. Del. Oct. 26, 2006) (Jordan, J.), at 1 n.1.)%> Given the increased awareness of Federal Circuit reversal rates of multi-claim decisions, perhaps the Court's action is a signal to the bar - the less claims, the better.
