Farrago v. Rawlings Sporting Goods (Fed. Cir. 2009)
Farrago's patent covers a pad for relieving knee stress. The argument focused on whether Rawlings' product has four surfaces (as claimed) or only three surfaces (as Rawlings argues). On appeal, the Federal Circuit quickly affirmed summary judgment of noninfringement without opinion. (A narrowing amendment during prosecution precluded application of the doctrine of equivalents.)
I'll only focus here briefly on the appellate practice. Farrago submitted a sample of the accused product to the appellate court so that the judges and clerks could examine the product prior to oral arguments. During oral arguments, the court thanked Farrago's attorney - noting that the sample "was very helpful." Of course, the court needed only 24 hours to release its opinion against Farrago.
