A Washington federal judge has dismissed inventor Jay Schuyleman’s patent infringement lawsuit against Barnhart Crane and Rigging Co., finding the claims in his crane system patent too indefinite to be enforced.
In a sharply critical opinion issued Friday, U.S. District Judge James Robart ruled that Schuyleman’s U.S. Patent No. 8,317,244 failed to meet the precision required under patent law. At the heart of the ruling was the term “offset hoisting apparatus,” which the judge said was too imprecise and riddled with internal inconsistencies.
Core Term Renders Patent Indefinite
Judge Robart found that the term “offset hoisting apparatus,” a central component of the patent’s claims, lacked clarity and consistency between the patent’s claim language, written description, and accompanying figures.
“In reading the claim language in tandem with the written description and figures, the ‘244 patent lacks the precision required to afford clear notice of what is claimed,” Judge Robart wrote. The inconsistencies were significant enough, he said, that a person of ordinary skill in the field would be unable to determine the scope of the invention.
While Schuyleman claimed the apparatus was made up of a rigid boom, a front mount, and a rear mount, Judge Robart pointed out contradictions in the language suggesting those components were instead part of the claimed improvement itself. The figures included in the patent only compounded this confusion.
