Court Opinion

ID: 9440972
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 17:14:31.698722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:01.697173
License: Public Domain

MAYER, Circuit Judge,
dissenting-in-part.
I would affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,449,927 (“'927 patent”). The '927 patent requires a single controller to receive a patient’s prescription information and control the entire apparatus, including the vibratory dispenser, the container transport assembly, and the vial transport assembly. See '927 patent claim 1. Allowing multiple controllers to perform these functions under the guise of a single control unit or system disregards the claim requirement that a single “controller” be used. Because the accused devices do not have a single controller that performs the required functions, and AutoMed Technologies, Inc. did not pursue a doctrine of equivalents argument before the trial court, Microfil, LLC does not infringe the '927 patent.