Federal Circuit Affirms Claim Construction and Rejects Indefiniteness Argument

Honeywell Int'l, Inc. v. United States (Fed. Cir. May 25, 2010)

In this case, the Federal Circuit affirmed the claim construction from the Court of Federal Claims but also found that the Court of Federal Claims deviated from its claim construction in its obviousness analysis.

The patent at issue related to passive night vision goggles that are compatible with a full color display when both are used in an aircraft cockpit.  During claim construction, the Court of Federal Claims construed the term "local color display" as requiring the emission of perceptible red light.  The Federal Circuit agreed, stating "The claimed invention addressed the need for red warning lights in NVG-compatible cockpits, and it is inconceivable that an aircraft would use warning lights that are not perceptible to the crew. In other words, there would be no point, in the context of this invention, to pass a narrowband of red light that cannot be seen."

The Federal Circuit also found that the Court of Federal Claims "deviated" from this claim construction in its obviousness analysis when the court stated that is claim construction did not require the perception of red and instead required only that at lease one color be perceptible.

The government also contended that the patent claim was indefinite, arguing that the construction of "local color display" included the word "perceptible" which is "a subjective standard amenable to two different interpretations - color and brightness."  The Federal Circuit disagreed, stating that "We do not perceive any difficulty or confusion in determining what is a local color display and what is not a local color display in terms of the '914 patent. That is, local color displays are displays that emit visible, color light."