Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

MTD Prods. Inc. v. Iancu

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

August 12, 2019, Decided

2017-2292

Opinion

 [*1338]  Stoll, Circuit Judge.

The Toro Company sought inter partes review of claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 8,011,458 before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board instituted review and, in its final written decision, held the challenged claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Critical to its decision, the Board determined that the claim term "mechanical control assembly . . . configured to" perform certain functions is not a means-plus-function term subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6. MTD Products Inc., owner of the '458 patent, appeals the Board's decision.

We conclude that the Board erred by conflating corresponding structure in the specification with a structural definition for the term, and by [**2]  misinterpreting certain statements in the prosecution history. Under the appropriate legal framework, we conclude that the term "mechanical control assembly" is a means-plus-function term governed by § 112, ¶ 6. We therefore vacate the Board's obviousness conclusion, which was predicated on its incorrect claim construction, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Because we are persuaded by MTD's primary argument, we do not reach its alternative arguments.

Background

The '458 patent discloses a steering and driving system for zero turn radius ("ZTR") vehicles, with specific reference to ZTR lawn mowers. '458 patent col. 1 ll. 17-21. The patented system is designed to provide a more intuitive steering mechanism to operators of ZTR vehicles. Id. at col. 1 ll. 20-38. In contrast to prior art  [*1339]  systems that

reverse in the opposite direction of a forward motion turn, the claimed invention permits ZTR vehicles to turn in the same direction both forward and backwards. Id. at col. 1 ll. 20-47. The claimed steering mechanism thus mimics the forward and backward movements of an automobile.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

933 F.3d 1336 *; 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23889 **; 2019 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 298144; 2019 WL 3770828

MTD PRODUCTS INC., Appellant v. ANDREI IANCU, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Intervenor

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2016-00194.

Disposition: VACATED AND REMANDED.

CORE TERMS

assembly, mechanical, specification, means-plus-function, recite, speed, steering, skill, drive wheel, configured, sufficiently definite, corresponding, nonce, ordinary person, connotes, format, drive, coupled, patent, rotate, left and right, speed control, structures, discloses, functions, input, words

Patent Law, US Patent & Trademark Office Proceedings, Appeals, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Substantial Evidence, Claims & Specifications, Claims, Claim Language, Specifications, Description Requirement, Means Plus Function, Proof, Definiteness, Description Requirement