Aboutwhy sjkplawyerspracticesInsightsCase StudyNewsLocations
Intellectual Property

Claim Construction

Your company has been accused of infringing a patent, or you own one and believe a competitor is using it. Before anyone argues about whether a product infringes, someone has to decide what the claim language actually covers.

Reviewed

01 GUIDE

Claim Construction: what usually happens

Why the meaning of a few words matters so much

Claim construction is the step in a patent case where the court interprets disputed terms in the patent's claims. Judges treat it as a legal question, decided by the court rather than a jury, often after a separate proceeding called a Markman hearing. A narrow reading can take an accused product outside the patent, while a broad one can sweep it in and also expose the patent to invalidity arguments based on earlier technology. Because so much rides on it, many cases settle or are resolved on motion soon after the ruling. This keyword sometimes confuses people outside patent law; it has nothing to do with building construction.

What the court reads

Courts start with the patent itself: the claim language, the written description, and the record of what the applicant told the patent office while the patent was being examined. Statements made during examination can narrow a term, even if the claim language alone seems broad. Dictionaries, technical treatises, and testimony from technical witnesses can be considered, but they generally carry less weight than the patent's own record. Many federal districts have local patent rules requiring the parties to exchange proposed terms and constructions on a fixed schedule. Proceedings before the patent office's trial board, which can challenge a patent's validity, now use a similar standard for reading claims.

Preparing early

The constructions you propose have to fit both your infringement position and your validity position, and the two can pull in different directions. That is why we look at claim construction from the start of a dispute rather than when the court's schedule requires it. We review the patent, its examination history, related patents in the same family, and the accused product or process. We talk about which terms are likely to be disputed and what testimony may be needed. If a dispute has not yet become a lawsuit, an early read on likely constructions can inform whether to license, design around, or challenge the patent.

02 ATTORNEYS

Who you would be working with

Attorneys at our New York and Washington, D.C. offices handle matters like this one.

05 HOW WE WORK

Client-centered service across jurisdictions

Global Coordination & Expertise

We deliver coordinated and effective legal services to our clients, utilizing our extensive legal resources and experienced attorneys in our well-integrated global network. Through our Washington D.C. and New York offices, together with our alliance

Multilingual & Cross-Border Communication

Our attorneys are experienced in both domestic and international matters and, with fluency in various languages, provide clear and consistent communication at every stage of your legal process.

Client-Centered Approach

Client service lies at the heart of our operations. From the initial consultation, we prioritize understanding your situation, listening to your goals, and providing regular updates and strategies tailored to your individual case.

Multidisciplinary & Efficient Solutions

Our multidisciplinary approach and established processes enable us to address cross-border challenges with efficiency.

06 OFFICES

Where we meet clients

Consultations are available in person or remotely.

New York

285 Fulton Street, New York, NY 10007
(855) 529-7557

Washington, D.C.

Suite 985, 1717 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006
(855) 529-7557

Los Angeles

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 820, Los Angeles, CA 90067
(424) 561-7557

Attorney Advertising. This page is general information about claim construction and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on the facts of each matter, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Laws differ by state and change over time.