SRAM loses patent appeal

SRAM

SRAM Corp. v. AD-II Engineering, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2004) (not precedent).

In the Northern District of Illinois, SRAM sued AD-II for infringement of its patented rotatable grip technology. (U.S. Patent No. 5,662,000).  The district court granted summary judgment of infringement holding that “there is simply no question that the notches on the AD-II device serve the same function (engaging the spring) in the same way (through rotation of the grip) to achieve the same result (releasing or pulling on a cable and shifting derailleur gears).” 

On appeal, AD-II argued that SRAM had disclaimed coverage over “any gear shifter having a rotatable support member,” and thus SRAM’s claims should not cover AD-II’s products that contain such a member.  Based on amendments made by SRAM during prosecution, the Appellate Panel (BRYSON) agreed.  Reversed and remanded.

In dissent, Chief Judge Mayer argued that the amendments made during prosecution were to provide an antecedent basis for claim terms — not to overcome prior art or obviousness type objections.  As such, no disclaimer should be found.