CROWN PACKAGING TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. BELVAC PRODUCTION MACHINERY, INC.
Before Dyk, Hughes, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia.
Summary: An offer for sale described as a “quotation,” containing specific and complete terms and directed to an entity in the U.S., constitutes a commercial offer for sale.
Crown Packaging Technology, Inc. sued Belvac Production Machinery, Inc., alleging infringement of three patents directed to necking machines used in making metal beverage cans. Belvac argued the patents were invalid as anticipated under the pre-AIA on-sale bar (35 U.S.C. § 102(b)) because Crown offered to sell a necking machine embodying the asserted claims in the U.S. more than a year before its patents were filed. The district court granted summary judgment to Crown, ruling the patents were not invalid under the on-sale bar. After a jury trial, the court entered a judgment that the asserted claims were not invalid and not infringed.
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s validity finding because it held the asserted patents were invalid under the on-sale bar. The Federal Circuit found that, while Crown’s letter to a third-party was a “quotation,” it still constituted an offer to sell the claimed inventions. Specifically, the court noted that the letter was signed by Crown’s representative, sent to a specific third-party, and included a detailed description of the claimed inventions, a price, and delivery terms. The court further found that Crown’s offer was made in the U.S. because the quotation letter was sent to the third-party’s place of business in Colorado. Because it found the on-sale bar applied, the court reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in Belvac’s favor.
Editor: Sean Murray
Subscribe for News and Updates
