SEARFOSS v. PIONEER CONSOLIDATED CORPORATION (Fed. Cir. June 6, 2004)
Searfoss appealed the district court’s claim construction and resulting summary judgment of non-infringement of its patented truck bed covers. (U.S. Patent 5,031,955).
Because a finding of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents would vitiate the requirement of a direct connection through an actuation means, no reasonable jury could find that the accused device is insubstantially different than the claimed invention. Summary judgment of non-infringement is thus appropriate.
Because the district court correctly construed the disputed claim terms of the ’955 patent and thus Pioneer did not infringe claim 3 under the doctrine of equivalents, the district court’s entry of summary judgment on non-infringement is AFFIRMED