The court reversed the PTAB’s constructions, under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, of the terms “adapted to be held by the human hand” and “thumb switch being adapted for activation by the human thumb.” The PTAB’s constructions were unreasonable, because they were not made in light of the specification, which identified what was meant by these terms. Applying the proper construction, the court reversed the anticipation findings, but affirmed some of the obviousness findings and remand for further findings in light of the proper construction as to other claims.
In re: Man Machine Interface Technologies LLC., Case No. 2015-1562 (April 19, 2016); Opinion by: Stoll, joined by Lourie and O’Malley; Appealed From: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Read the full opinion here.