Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC v. Maze Innovations, Inc., No. 15 C 1138, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Dec. 28, 2016) (Kennelly, J.).
Judge Kennelly construed the disputed terms of plaintiff Green Pet Shop’s patents to a pressure-activated cooling pad for pets. Of particular note, the Court held as follows:
- The Court did not construe every portion of each claim. The Court focused only on those terms that were in controversy and only as necessary to resolve the dispute.
- “Recharging” was construed as “reversing.” Green Pet did not disavow this broad construction because the specification used the broader definition and Green Pet Shop’s statement in the prosecution history were not a clear disavowal.
- “Endothermically Activated” was construed based upon its plain meaning as “absorbs heat.”
- “Endothermically Deactivated” was construed as “releases heat.” While the plain meaning was not “released heat,” the specification defined it as “releases heat.”