Digest of World Class Tech. Corp. v. Ormco Corp., Nos. 2013-1679, 2014-1692 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 20, 2014) (precedential). On appeal from D. Or. Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes.

Procedural Posture: Declaratory judgment defendant-appellant Ormco appealed a stipulated judgment of noninfringement based on the district court’s alleged error in construing two claim terms. The Federal Circuit affirmed the construction of one term, and affirmed the judgment of noninfringement.

  • Claim Construction: The parties disputed the meaning of the term “support surface” in a claim to an orthodontic bracket that slides away from the tooth when open, instead of upward towards the gums. Accused infringer World Class Technology argued that the “support surface” must support the slide as it moves along its path. Patentee Ormco argued that such a support would have contacted the gums, which is “out of keeping with the description of the invention.” The district court properly resolved the uncertainties in the claim language and adopted a construction that aligns with the description of the invention, requiring the support surface “at least partially supports and guides the movable member during movement between the open position and the closed position.”