Corning Glass Works v. Sumitomo Electric USA, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
868 F.2d 1251 (1989)
Relevant factsFree
Corning (plaintiff) owned a fiber-optic cable patent requiring a "doping material" element, and Sumitomo's (defendant's) cable, while slightly different, was found by the district court to infringe under the doctrine of equivalents; Sumitomo argued its cable violated the All Elements rule because the "doping material" limitation wasn't substituted for but was entirely missing.
IssueFree
Whether an accused device can properly be considered infringing under the doctrine of equivalents where it does not contain each literal element or an equivalent for each element in the claim.
Related cases
Tsubakimoto Seiko Co. Ltd. v. THK K.K.Case No. 1994 (o) 1083Graver Tank v. Linde Air Products Co.339 U.S. 605 (1950)Warner-Jenkinson Company v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.520 U.S. 17 (1997)SciMed Life Systems, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.242 F.3d 1337 (2001)MacArthur v. University of Texas Health Center at Tyler45 F.3d 890 (5th Cir. 1995)