CIAS v. Alliance Gaming Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2007)
CIAS asserted its counterfeit protection patent against both Alliance Gaming and Bally’s but lost on summary judgment of non-infringement. On appeal, the CAFC reversed the claim construction, but affirmed the judgment.
‘Comprised of’ is an open-ended transition: Rather than the traditional “comprising” transition, CIAS wrote that its invention was “comprised of” several elements. The district court construed “comprised of” as a “closed-end term that excludes the presence of all [non-presented] elements.” On appeal, the CAFC reversed holding simply that “comprised of” is the same as “comprising” and should be interpreted as open ending.
The appellate panel did, however, give a narrow definition to the claimed “unique authorization information” — holding that it had been narrowed by prosecution arguments.
Notes:
- PTO records show 134,000 patents including “comprised of” language.
