No Evidence to Send Issue to Jury
The court also faulted Schuyleman for failing to present any evidence or arguments sufficient to support his claims or overcome Barnhart’s invalidity challenge. Judge Robart emphasized that Schuyleman didn’t address the key inconsistencies flagged in the claim construction process.
“In his response, Mr. Schuyleman does not address the identified inconsistencies between the claim language, the written description, and the figures,” Robart noted.
Adding to the blow, Schuyleman’s own summary judgment bid was denied. He had sought to exclude expert testimony backing Barnhart’s invalidity defense rather than supplying counterevidence. But the court had already declined to exclude that testimony, and found Schuyleman’s efforts insufficient to defeat Barnhart’s motion.
Trial Canceled as Case Ends Preemptively
A trial had been scheduled for June 16 before Barnhart succeeded in convincing the court to rule early. Schuyleman had filed the suit in April 2023, alleging that three of Barnhart’s moveable counterweight cantilever systems infringed his patent, which was aimed at improving load-lifting mechanisms used to hoist materials into building openings.
However, with the central term deemed indefinite, the court dismissed the case entirely.
