From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Prima Tek II, L.L.C. v. Polypap, S.A.R.L.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
412 F.3d 1284 (2005)
Prima Tek II, L.L.C. (defendant) held two patents for assemblies and methods for displaying floral arrangements. Prima Tek sued Polypap (plaintiff) alleging that Polypap’s product infringed its claims, particularly those requiring the assemblies to have a “floral holding material”; be without any “pot means”; and have a “crimped portion” with at least one “overlapping fold.” The district court granted summary judgment of no infringement based on its construction of “floral holding material,” which was limited to floral foam or soil. This court vacated the judgment and remanded for further consideration, finding the district court’s construction improperly restricted the term beyond its ordinary meaning. Upon remand, after giving the word “pot” its ordinary meaning, the court concluded that a French patent application disclosing flowers arranged in a mass of wetted moss showed the limitation of without any pot means. The French application discloses tightening a waterproof covering around the assembly with a cord passing through holes in the covering. However, the district court found that the reference failed to show the floral holding material after construing the limitation to require the material to hold a predetermined shape. Despite the reference’s disclosure, its drawings, and its inventor’s testimony that tightening the cord through the material creates overlapping folds, the court found the reference failed to show the crimping limitation. Accordingly, the district court concluded that Prima Tek’s patents were not invalid and infringed by Polypap. The court enjoined Polypap from further infringement, and Polypap appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Dyk, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.