The following excerpt is from Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée v. Eurocopter, société par actions simplifiée, 2013 FCA 219 (CanLII):
As noted in Whirlpool at para. 53, the words used in a patent must be looked at and understood “through the eyes and with the common knowledge of a worker of ordinary skill in the field to which the patent relates.” This enables the reader to appreciate the nature and description of the invention on a technical level. Consequently, in construing the claims, a judge may be assisted by expert witnesses. However, a judge is not bound by the opinion of any expert. A judge’s assessment of the expert evidence will not be reversed on appeal absent palpable and overriding error: Halford v. Seed Hawk Inc. 2006 FCA 275, 54 C.P.R. (4th) 130 at para. 11; Weatherford at para. 24. First issue: Did the Judge err in holding that the rear cross piece of the landing gear disclosed in the ‘787 Patent must be vertical or substantially vertical?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.