Rulings Against Defendant in Patent Case Involving "POL Regulators" Upheld

By Javier Lavagnino, Esq. on March 30, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In Power-One, Inc. v. Artesyn Techs., Inc., No. 2008-1501, the circuit court faced an appeal brought by the defendant in an action claiming infringement of patents relating to power supply systems for controlling, programming and monitoring point-of-load (POL) regulators.

The judgment against defendant was affirmed as: 1) the district court's claim construction of the term "POL regulator" was adequate to fully describe the scope of the claims; 2) the claim term "POL regulator" is not indefinite and does not render the claims of one patent indefinite; and 3) sufficient evidence supports a finding that the scope of prior art was limited, that there are significant differences between the invention disclosed in a patent and the prior art, and that relevant secondary considerations support a finding of nonobviousness.   

Related Resources

Copied to clipboard