Mosaic ImmunoEngineering Inc (CPMV)

[drobx]

Keep in mind that this is the issue presented:

"Whether the United States Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit’s development and application of
the doctrine of “prosecution history disclaimer” is
consistent with fundamental principles of separation
of powers, the Patent Act, and long-established
Supreme Court precedent."

The supreme court is not being asked to rule whether anyone infringed on PTSC's patents. The court will take up the issue if it looks like this doctrine of "prosecution history disclaimer" needs to be modified, reinforced, clarified, or whatever. If PTSC wins it only means that there would have to be a retrial at a lower court level.

I put "prosecution history disclaimer" into a search engine. Here is a fairly understandable definition:
"Whenever an applicant makes a clear and unambiguous argument that a claim does not cover a certain feature, this argument becomes binding on the applicant and the applicant cannot later argue in court that the claim would cover such a feature. Coverage of that feature is considered "disclaimed" by the applicant and cannot be recovered. The scope of the resulting patent is narrower than it might be if the applicant had said nothing.

Prosecution disclaimer ensures that an applicant cannot obtain a patent by arguing that its claimed invention is narrow, and then turn around and enforce that patent against competitors with an argument that it is broader."
http://dictionary.sensagent.com/prosecution%20disclaimer/en-en/

Here is a link that discusses our case:
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2019/09/prosecution-history-disclaimer.html