Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company

The C.A.F.C. held that applying the Doctorine of Equivalents to the claim limitation "slidably mounted" to find a "rotatably mounted" apparatus infringing would "completely vitiate" the claim limitation.

• MP3: Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company(Fed. Cir. 2005) (citations omitted)
• PDF: Freedman Seating Company v. American Seating Company(Fed. Cir. 2005) (full text)
• I/P Updates: Doctrine of Equivalents Must Not 'Vitiate' Limitation
• Patently-O: CAFC Further Vitiates Doctrine of Equivalents
• Patent Prospector: Have A Seat