The Federal Circuit's en banc decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir.
Phillips v. AWH: Practical Pointers on the Use of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evidence
The Federal Circuit's <i>en banc</i> decision in <i>Phillips v. AWH Corp.</i>, 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005), provides a reminder, for patent prosecution attorneys and patent litigators alike, of the types of evidence that can be used to support a patent claim construction. In short, intrinsic evidence ' namely, the claim language, specification and prosecution history ' remains the primary source materials for interpreting patent claims. On the other hand, extrinsic evidence ' namely, dictionaries, treatises and expert testimony ' may not have the same persuasive status previously accorded by the Federal Circuit's decision in <i>Texas Digital Sys., Inc. v. Telegenix, Inc.</i>, 308 F.3d 1193 (Fed. Cir. 2002). Nonetheless, extrinsic evidence retains its role in helping to explain the meaning of claim terms as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art. Extrinsic evidence also can be useful to explain the "context" of the invention that informs any claim construction.
This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.






