INNOVENTION TOYS, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MGA ENTERTAINMENT, INC., WAL-MART STORES, INC., AND TOYS "R" US, INC., Defendants-Appellants., 637 F.3d 1314


Summary

The '242 patent claimed a chess-like, light-reflecting board game and methods of playing the same. Regarding infringement, on appeal, one of the defendants did not argue that the district court erred in construing "movable" to mean "capable of movement as called for by the rules of the game or game strategy. Rather, it argued that the district court improperly broadened its construction during the second step of the infringement analysis by adding capable of movement "during game set up," and thus erred in finding that a game's pieces met the "movable" limitation. The court rejected this argument and agreed in main with the district court's infringement analysis, affirming the decision holding that the game literally infringed the asserted claims of the '242 patent. With regard to the 35 U.S.C.S. § 103 obviousness issue, the court concluded that the district court clearly erred in several of the factual findings underlying its obviousness analysis. The district court erred in finding ...