The one-year anniversary of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s landmark en banc decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp. , 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005), has come and gone. Roughly 150 reported decisions and almost 250 unpublished decisions have cited Phillips since the decision was issued. It is now typically the first case cited in courts’ analyses of patent claims. All in all, claim interpretation in the first year of the post- Phillips era did not experience a major sea change-at least not like that envisioned when the court of appeals first announced that the entire panel would be addressing some of the most vexing issues surrounding claim construction. But the decision has had an impact. In some cases, Phillips changed the outcome.
The significance of claim construction in patent litigation easily tells the story of why all eyes were focused on Phillips . In many, if not most, patent lawsuits, obtaining a favorable claim construction translates to a total victory. A broad interpretation usually means that the defendant’s product or method infringes the plaintiff’s invention. A narrow interpretation often means the defendant escapes liability. And because claim construction is generally one of the first substantive matters addressed in a patent case, winning the claim-construction ruling is usually the quickest and most devastating blow one can deal to an opponent.
