Opinion ID: 2792853
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Construction of “Attached”

Text: The district court concluded that the asserted claims of the ’095 and ’131 patents, which recite that the knob and ferrule are slidably and rotatably “attached,” require that the knob be directly connected to the ferrule. The district court did not rely on extrinsic evidence in construing the claims. ’095 and ’131 Order, 2012 WL 246253, at  n.7. SOUTHCO, INC. v. FIVETECH TECHNOLOGY INC. 7 We agree with the district court’s construction. Southco is correct that the ordinary meaning of “attached” includes both direct and indirect attachment. However, the claim requires more—namely that the ferrule and knob are attached “such that when the threaded shaft is in a retracted position, the threaded shaft captivation means prevents the ferrule and the knob from separating.” ’095 patent col. 6 ll. 25–29. An indirect attachment would not satisfy the limitation that the “the threaded shaft captivation means prevents the ferrule and the knob from separating” because if the ferrule and knob are already separated—i.e., not directly attached—the threaded shaft captivation means cannot prevent them from separating. Nothing in the specification compels a construction of “attached” that includes indirect attachment. None of the embodiments nor any discussion states that indirectly attached parts are “attached.” Southco argues that two passages in the specification support its position. We do not agree. First, Southco argues that “attached” includes indirect attachment because the patent discloses that “[t]he screw is attachable to the first panel.” Id. col. 1 ll. 36–37. This passage does not support Southco because the captive screw is directly attached to the first panel. See id. col. 1 ll. 38–44 (“The captive screw has . . . a ferrule that attaches to the upper panel.”). Second, Southco argues that “attached” includes indirect attachment because the patent discloses that the screw “is used for attaching the first panel to a lower surface . . . having a threaded hole.” Id. col. 1 ll. 37–38. This passage does not support Southco because the first panel and lower surface touch. See id. Fig. 3. Accordingly, the specification’s use of “attached” is consistent with its ordinary meaning as used in the claim: direct attachment. Although claim 1 of the ’131 patent uses “engaged” instead of “attached,” both parties agree that the terms should be construed similarly. We agree no separate 8 SOUTHCO, INC. v. FIVETECH TECHNOLOGY INC. analysis is necessary. As used in the asserted claims of the ’095 and ’131 patents, “attached” means direct attachment and “engaged” means direct engagement.