HYPOTHETICAL CANADIAN CLAIM CONSTRUCTION IN THE RIM LAWSUIT

The purpose of this thesis is (1) to test the hypothesis advanced by Canadian patent litigators that Canadian courts take a broader approach to patent claim construction than their American counterparts, and (2) to comment on a hypothetical patent claim construction for Research in Motion (“RIM”) litigation assuming that RIM would have been sued in Canada. The analysis for the first question is based on an evaluation of Canadian decisions rendered by Canadian courts after Whirlpool Corp. v. Cameo Inc. and Free World Trust v. Électro Santé Inc. and does not include pharmaceutical cases. The findings of the thesis disprove the hypothesis advanced by the Canadian litigators and find that the Canadian courts construe patent claims narrowly. Moreover, a study prepared for the American Intellectual Property Law Association seems to support the findings of this thesis. In relation to answering the second question, based on the evidence, claim construction would likely be similar in Canada in relation to certain phrases and was inconclusive with respect to other phrases.

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Law

Year dc:date.issued

2009

Author dc:creator

• Bernards, Sebastian

• Patent claim construction
• infringement
• validity
• Research In Motion
• RIM
• NTP
• Canada
• United States
• Broad patent claim construction
• Narrow patent claim construction
• patents
• intellectual property
• patent litigation
• Whirlpool Corp. v. Cameo Inc.
• Free World Trust v. Electro Santé Inc.

Handle dc:identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14721/19319

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:uwo.scholaris.ca:20.500.14721/19319