Practice question
Two processes produce a similar commercial result. The patent owner presents no evidence connecting the accused process's elements to the construed claim elements and insists that overall similarity alone proves equivalence. Under Phillips Seafood and Tuna Processors, which is sound?
- A similar commercial result conclusively proves every claim element.
- Claim construction can always be skipped.
- Equivalence requires the relevant element-based comparison; overall result alone does not establish the missing analysis.
- Every process with the same market is automatically identical.
- Only product branding matters.
Legal references
- RA8293, IP Code, Sections28–30,71–76: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1997/ra_8293_1997.html
- RA9502 amendments to IP Code Sections72 and74: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2008/ra_9502_2008.html
- Phillips Seafood v. Tuna Processors, GR214148, February6 2023, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/feb2023/gr_214148_2023.html
- Tuna Processors v. Frescomar/Hawaii International Seafood, GR226445/226631, February27 2024, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/feb2024/gr_226445_2024.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.