均等論的三段測不了試

均等論的三段測不了試
Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company and Hi-Tech Seating Products, Inc., (No. 04-1216, -1248; August 11, 2005)

Specifically, the patent claims that the movable end of the seatbase support member is “slidably mounted” to the seatbase. In contrast, the support member of the accused product is “rotatably mounted” to the seatbase.

“slidably mounted”與“rotatably mounted”是否均等？

地院認為： perform substantially the same function in substantially the same manner to achieve substantially the same result.

CAFC continues: “Freedman's argument would mean that any support member capable of allowing translational and rotational motion would be equivalent to a support member “slidably mounted to said seatbase,” which reads “slidably mounted” completely out of the claims. This is precisely the type of DOE overextension that the claim vitiation doctrine is intended to prevent.”

關鍵字：completely out of the claims、the type of DOE overextension、the claim vitiation doctrine

我想這就是這篇均等論的適用文章所說的「“The doctrine of equivalents cannot be used to erase ‘meaningful structural and functional limitations of the claim on which the public is entitled to rely in avoiding infringement.’”」吧。