Case: Mikkelsen Graphic Eng’g, Inc. v. Zund Am.,Inc., No. 2012-1472 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2013) (nonprecedential). On appeal from E.D. Wis. Before Dyk, Bryson, and Wallach.

Procedural Posture: Defendant accused infringer appealed from district court summary judgment of infringement, no invalidity, and injunction. CAFC affirmed with respect to infringement, but vacated summary judgment of no invalidity, vacated the injunction, and remanded.

  • Infringement: CAFC affirmed the district court’s claim constructions, finding them supported by the plain language of the claims and specification. Because defendant appealed infringement only on claim construction grounds, CAFC affirmed infringement.
  • Validity: Defendant moved for summary judgment of invalidity. The district court denied the motion and sua sponte granted summary judgment of no invalidity. This was improper, as defendant did not have notice that it needed to come forward with all of its evidence, especially here, where the district court revised its claim constructions after briefing of the motion.