/* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ DATA — Real Lexdana URLs and USPTO PDF links from Pedram's mockup ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ const VENUES = [ { "id": "prosecution-us", "label": "Prosecution (US)", "short": "USPTO", "vclass": "v-pros", "color": "#BA7517", "available": true }, { "id": "ipr", "label": "IPR / PTAB", "short": "PTAB", "vclass": "v-ipr", "color": "#534AB7", "available": false }, { "id": "district", "label": "District Court", "short": "D.Ct.", "vclass": "v-dct", "color": "#0F6E56", "available": true }, { "id": "cafc", "label": "CAFC", "short": "CAFC", "vclass": "v-cafc", "color": "#D85A30", "available": true }, { "id": "itc", "label": "ITC", "short": "ITC", "vclass": "v-itc", "color": "#0F6E56", "available": false } ]; const DOCTRINES = [ { "id": "A.1.4", "label": "§112(a)", "count": 14 }, { "id": "A.1.3", "label": "§103", "count": 12 }, { "id": "A.1.6", "label": "§112(b)", "count": 12 }, { "id": "A.2.1", "label": "Phillips Framework", "count": 8 }, { "id": "A.3.2", "label": "Prosecution History Estoppel (Festo)", "count": 8 }, { "id": "A.3.2.d", "label": "Argument", "count": 8 }, { "id": "D.4.1", "label": "§271(a) Direct Infringement", "count": 8 }, { "id": "A.2.4", "label": "Specification as Context (not import limitations)", "count": 7 }, { "id": "D.3.1", "label": "§282 Presumption of Validity / Clear", "count": 7 }, { "id": "D.6.10", "label": "Permanent Injunction", "count": 6 }, { "id": "B.1.6", "label": "§112(b) Indefiniteness Rejection", "count": 5 }, { "id": "D.4.2", "label": "§271(b) Induced Infringement", "count": 5 }, { "id": "A.1.6.c", "label": "Term", "count": 3 }, { "id": "A.3.1", "label": "Prosecution Disclaimer (Omega Engineering)", "count": 3 }, { "id": "B.1.4", "label": "§112(a) Written Description Rejection", "count": 3 }, { "id": "E.2.1", "label": "§1295 Exclusive Patent Jurisdiction", "count": 3 }, { "id": "E.2.2", "label": "Article III Standing on Appeal (esp. for IPR appeals)", "count": 3 }, { "id": "E.2.4", "label": "Final", "count": 3 }, { "id": "A.1.3.b", "label": "Reasonable Expectation of Success", "count": 2 }, { "id": "A.3.1.b", "label": "Disclaimer by Argument Distinguishing Prior Art", "count": 2 }, { "id": "A.4.1", "label": "Doctrine of Equivalents (DOE)", "count": 2 }, { "id": "A.5.4", "label": "Patent Misuse", "count": 2 }, { "id": "B.1.3", "label": "§103 Rejection (with Graham/KSR articulation requirements)", "count": 2 }, { "id": "B.2.13", "label": "Examiner Interview Practice (MPEP §713)", "count": 1 }, { "id": "B.2.1", "label": "Restriction Requirement / Election of Species", "count": 0 }, { "id": "B.2.14", "label": "Examiner's Reasons for Allowance (MPEP §1302.14)", "count": 0 }, { "id": "D.2.1", "label": "Markman Hearing", "count": 0 }, { "id": "D.2.3", "label": "O2 Micro Duty in District Court", "count": 0 } ]; const LIMITATIONS = [ { "id": "a", "originalId": "1.3", "label": "administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "displayLabel": "Element (a) — administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "kind": "body", "sigType": "shaped", "colorClass": "lid-a", "text": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "specAnchors": [ { "id": "sa-1.3-1", "type": "embodiment", "location": "Spec. p. 10 · col. 5 · ll. 5–25", "title": "Spec passage for limitation 1.3", "passage": "

administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof

", "highlight": "administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "caption": "", "snapshotPath": "snapshots/spec/claim_1_lim_1.3.png" } ] }, { "id": "b", "originalId": "1.4", "label": "wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…", "displayLabel": "Element (b) — wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "kind": "wherein", "sigType": "stable", "colorClass": "lid-b", "text": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "specAnchors": [ { "id": "sa-1.4-1", "type": "embodiment", "location": "Spec. p. 8 · col. 1 · ll. 35–50", "title": "Spec passage for limitation 1.4", "passage": "

removing the responding subject from treatment wherein after removal of treatment there is a durability of response.

", "highlight": "removing the responding subject from treatment wherein after removal of treatment there is a durability of response.", "caption": "", "snapshotPath": "snapshots/spec/claim_1_lim_1.4.png" } ] }, { "id": "c", "originalId": "1.5", "label": "wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…", "displayLabel": "Element (c) — wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms", "kind": "wherein", "sigType": "shaped", "colorClass": "lid-c", "text": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms", "specAnchors": [ { "id": "sa-1.5-1", "type": "embodiment", "location": "Spec. p. 8 · col. 2 · ll. 1–15", "title": "Spec passage for limitation 1.5", "passage": "

the durability of response comprises from at least between about 1 and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms.

", "highlight": "the durability of response comprises from at least between about 1 and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms.", "caption": "", "snapshotPath": "snapshots/spec/claim_1_lim_1.5.png" } ] } ]; /* Claim lifecycle states — V0 is the spec-anchored plain meaning at filing (Layer 2); V1–V5 are the claim-text states modified by prosecution events (Layer 3+4) */ const CLAIM_VERSIONS = [ { "id": "v0", "stepLabel": "Plain meaning", "label": "As anchored in specification", "date": "2009-02-26", "isAnchor": true, "isIssued": false, "changeIcon": "§", "changeTitle": "Plain meaning at filing — anchored in the patent specification", "changeBody": "Before any examiner rejection or amendment, the claim's meaning is grounded in the specification's definitions, embodiments, and enumerations.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "v1", "stepLabel": "Filed", "label": "As filed (Feb 26, 2009)", "date": "2009-02-26", "isIssued": false, "changeIcon": "1", "changeTitle": "Originally filed — App. 12/393,979", "changeBody": "Original filing of the application; the as-filed claim is on the file wrapper.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "v2", "stepLabel": "Rejected", "label": "After Non-Final Rejection", "date": "2011-12-05", "isIssued": false, "changeIcon": "2", "changeTitle": "Non-Final Rejection", "changeBody": "Examiner issues Non-Final Rejection. No claim text change yet — applicant must respond.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "v3", "stepLabel": "Amended", "label": "After Amendment", "date": "2009-08-13", "isIssued": false, "changeIcon": "3", "changeTitle": "Amendment / Response", "changeBody": "Applicant files Amendment + Remarks to overcome the rejection. New limitations may be added or narrowed.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "v4", "stepLabel": "Polished", "label": "After NOA / Examiner's Amendment", "date": "2012-09-27", "isIssued": false, "changeIcon": "4", "changeTitle": "Notice of Allowance", "changeBody": "Notice of Allowance issued. Substantive scope unchanged from V3.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "v5", "stepLabel": "Issued", "label": "Issued as US 8,309,569", "date": "2012-11-13", "isIssued": true, "changeIcon": "★", "changeTitle": "Issued — US8309569", "changeBody": "Patent issued Nov 13, 2012. This is the issued scope on which all later litigation hangs.", "_venue": "prosecution-us", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "r1", "stepLabel": "DC Judgment", "label": "DCt event", "date": "2022-08-10", "isRuling": true, "outcome": "po-favorable", "positionId": null, "_matterShort": "1-2020-cv-00430", "_venue": "district", "changeIcon": "◆", "changeTitle": "DCt event", "changeBody": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } }, { "id": "r2", "stepLabel": "PTAB FWD", "label": "CAFC event", "date": "2024-04-11", "isRuling": true, "outcome": "po-favorable", "positionId": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001-1.3", "_matterShort": "CAFC-22-2153", "_venue": "cafc", "changeIcon": "◆", "changeTitle": "CAFC event", "changeBody": "CAFC-22-2153 · Federal Circuit panel: Lourie, Cunningham, Stark, JJ. (Lourie writing for the court)", "preamble": "1. A method, comprising:", "lims": { "a": "(a) administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof
administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days to a subject in need thereof", "b": "(b) wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durab…
wherein removing the subject from treatment after the 14 days results in a durability of response", "c": "(c) wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief o…
wherein the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms" } } ]; /* Events (real matter timeline — 20 events). isRuling flags binding authority decisions. */ const EVENTS = [ { "id": "prosecution-evt-001", "date": "2009-02-25", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Specification (as filed)", "sub": "Salix Pharmaceuticals (William Forbes, Lorin Johnson) — McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-002", "date": "2009-08-13", "type": "amendment", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Preliminary Amendment — Claims (added claim 74 et al.; cancelled many original claims)", "sub": "McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-003", "date": "2010-06-27", "type": "amendment", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Preliminary Amendment — Remarks", "sub": "McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-004", "date": "2011-07-11", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Requirement for Restriction/Election", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-005", "date": "2011-07-27", "type": "amendment", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Response to Election / Restriction — elected Group I (methods of treating bowel disease, species rifaximin)", "sub": "McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-006", "date": "2011-11-13", "type": "amendment", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Response to Election / Restriction — re-election filing", "sub": "McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-007", "date": "2011-11-30", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Examiner-initiated interview summary — telephone interview Nov 29, 2011 — election change", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-008", "date": "2011-12-05", "type": "rejection", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Non-Final Rejection — claim 74 — §112(2) indefiniteness ('durability of response') and §103(a) obviousness over Viscomi + ClinicalTrials.gov", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "prosecution-evt-008-1.3" }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-009", "date": "2012-05-09", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Applicant-initiated interview summary — May 5, 2012 interview discussing §112(2) and §103 rejections", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks for Applicants)", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-010", "date": "2012-05-15", "type": "amendment", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Amendment / Request for Reconsideration After Non-Final Rejection — defined 'durability of response' as 12–24 weeks; invoked §103(c) joint-research-agreement defense", "sub": "Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "prosecution-evt-010-1.3" }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-011", "date": "2012-08-21", "type": "rejection", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112(2) on cancelled claim 81's 'at least about 12 weeks'", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "prosecution-evt-011-1.3" }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-012", "date": "2012-09-09", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Applicant-initiated interview summary — Sept 5, 2012 in-person interview — agreed to amend to 'about 12 weeks'", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks and Stehana Patton for Applicants)", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "prosecution-evt-012-1.5" }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-013", "date": "2012-09-11", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Response After Final Action — implements the September 5 interview agreement; amends claim 74 to 'about 12 weeks'; cancels claim 81", "sub": "Jonathan M. Sparks, Reg. No. 53,624, McCarter & English, LLP", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "prosecution-evt-013-1.5" }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-014", "date": "2012-09-27", "type": "filing", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Examiner-initiated interview summary — September 19, 2012 telephonic interview — Examiner's Amendment to resolve disclosure objections", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks for Applicants)", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-015", "date": "2012-09-27", "type": "allowed", "venue": "prosecution-us", "color": "#BA7517", "title": "Notice of Allowance + Notice of Allowability — claims 74 and 80 allowed; Examiner's Amendment for formal items; silent allowance (no Statement of Reasons for Allowance)", "sub": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1629", "isRuling": true, "outcome": "po-favorable", "positionId": null }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-001", "date": "2021-04-29", "type": "markman", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": true, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-002", "date": "2022-04-28", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-002-1.3" }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-003", "date": "2022-06-02", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-003-1.5" }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-004", "date": "2022-06-09", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-004-1.5" }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-005", "date": "2022-06-09", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": false, "outcome": null, "positionId": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-005-1.3" }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006", "date": "2022-08-10", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": true, "outcome": null, "positionId": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006-1.3" }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-007", "date": "2022-08-10", "type": "order", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": true, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-008", "date": "2022-08-10", "type": "judgment", "venue": "district", "color": "#0F6E56", "title": "DCt event", "sub": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "isRuling": true, "outcome": null, "positionId": null }, { "id": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001", "date": "2024-04-11", "type": "fwd", "venue": "cafc", "color": "#D85A30", "title": "CAFC event", "sub": "CAFC-22-2153 · Federal Circuit panel: Lourie, Cunningham, Stark, JJ. (Lourie writing for the court)", "isRuling": true, "outcome": null, "positionId": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001-1.3" } ]; /* Rulings — binding authority decisions on the lifecycle stepper. For VLSI we have two big rulings on the merits arc: R1 = $1.5B W.D. Tex. jury verdict (PO won infringement) R2 = PTAB FWD (PO lost validity — adverse) CAFC remains pending — no R3 node, but the swimlane shows VLSI's appeal as a challenger position which triggers the PENDING capstone state. */ const RULINGS = [ { "id": "r1", "date": "2022-08-10", "label": "DCt event", "sublabel": "1-2020-cv-00430 · Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "authority": "DCt event", "outcome": "po-favorable", "positionId": null, "binding": false }, { "id": "r2", "date": "2024-04-11", "label": "CAFC event", "sublabel": "CAFC-22-2153 · Federal Circuit panel: Lourie, Cunningham, Stark, JJ. (Lourie writing for the court)", "authority": "CAFC event", "outcome": "po-favorable", "positionId": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001-1.3", "binding": true } ]; /* Positions — real content from PTAB Paper 10 (Inst. Decision IPR2021-01229), Director Vidal Paper 102 (sanctions), Paper 131, the W.D. Tex. verdict from VLSI's CAFC opening brief in 23-2158, and the Google Patents spec for US 7,523,373 B2. */ const POSITIONS = [ { "id": "prosecution-evt-008-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2011-12-05", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "A.1.6", "B.1.6", "A.1.3", "B.1.3", "A.1.3.b" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Non-Final Rejection — claim 74 — §112(2) indefiniteness ('durability of response') and §103(a) obviousness ove…", "detail": "§103(a) obviousness rejection over Viscomi (US 2005/0272754) as evidenced by ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00269412. The Examiner invoked the routine-optimization theory under In re Aller — finding that one skilled in gastroenterology would have been motivated to seek the optimal…", "narrative": "

On Dec 5, 2011, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 issued a Non-Final Rejection mapping this element.

§103(a) obviousness rejection over Viscomi (US 2005/0272754) as evidenced by ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00269412. The Examiner invoked the routine-optimization theory under In re Aller — finding that one skilled in gastroenterology would have been motivated to seek the optimal dose (1650 mg/day for 14 days) by routine experimentation given Viscomi's disclosed range of 100–1800 mg/day.

“Viscomi teaches the administration of rifaximin for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome and, additionally, in the treatment of diarrhea... With respect to the recited dosing regimen of rifaximin, i.e., 1650 mg/day for 14 days, it is not inventive to discover the optimal dose, or regimen, by routine experimentation when general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) and MPEP §2144.05(II).”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Non-Final Rejection — claim 74 — §112(2) indefiniteness ('durability of response') and §103(a) obviousness over Viscomi ", "docType": "Office Action Non Final", "date": "Dec 5, 2011", "page": "p. 5", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2011-12-05_CTNF_Non-Final-Rejection.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-008" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Dec 5, 2011" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "Viscomi teaches the administration of rifaximin for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome and, additionally, in the treatment of diarrhea... With respect to the recited dosing regimen of rifaximin, i.e., 1650 mg/day for 14 days, it is not inventive to discover the optimal dose, or regimen, by routine experimentatio" }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/phyllis-g-spivack-art-unit-1629" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-008-1.4", "limitationId": "b", "originalLimitationId": "1.4", "date": "2011-12-05", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "A.1.6", "B.1.6", "A.1.3", "B.1.3", "A.1.3.b" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Non-Final Rejection — claim 74 — §112(2) indefiniteness ('durability of response') and §103(a) obviousness ove…", "detail": "§112(2) indefiniteness rejection: the term 'durability of response' is 'relative' — the claim does not define the time frame and the spec does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree.", "narrative": "

On Dec 5, 2011, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 issued a Non-Final Rejection mapping this element.

§112(2) indefiniteness rejection: the term 'durability of response' is 'relative' — the claim does not define the time frame and the spec does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree.

“The recitation \"wherein removing the subject from treatment after 14 days results in a durability of response\" in claim 74 is relative and thus renders the claim indefinite. The time frame of \"durability of response\" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Non-Final Rejection — claim 74 — §112(2) indefiniteness ('durability of response') and §103(a) obviousness over Viscomi ", "docType": "Office Action Non Final", "date": "Dec 5, 2011", "page": "p. 4", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2011-12-05_CTNF_Non-Final-Rejection.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-008" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Dec 5, 2011" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "The recitation \"wherein removing the subject from treatment after 14 days results in a durability of response\" in claim 74 is relative and thus renders the claim indefinite. The time frame of \"durability of response\" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisi" }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/phyllis-g-spivack-art-unit-1629" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.4" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-010-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2012-05-15", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "A.3.1", "A.3.1.b", "A.1.6", "A.1.3", "A.5.4" ], "status": "rebuttal", "headline": "Amendment / Request for Reconsideration After Non-Final Rejection — defined 'durability of response' as 12–24 …", "detail": "Traversed §103 obviousness on a §103(c)(2)(C) ground — Salix and Viscomi's assignee Alfa Wassermann, S.p.A. were parties to a joint research agreement at the time of invention. Applicants amended the spec to recite the joint-research-agreement parties as required by §103(c).…", "narrative": "

On May 15, 2012, Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP amended the claim, modifying the limitation this element.

Traversed §103 obviousness on a §103(c)(2)(C) ground — Salix and Viscomi's assignee Alfa Wassermann, S.p.A. were parties to a joint research agreement at the time of invention. Applicants amended the spec to recite the joint-research-agreement parties as required by §103(c). This argument removed Viscomi as available prior art and mooted the §103 rejection without engaging on the merits of the routine-optimization theory.

“At the time the present invention was made, the Assignee of the instant application was entered into a joint research agreement with Alfa Wassermann, Sp.A., the Assignee of Viscomi. Applicants have amended the specification as required by 35 U.S.C. § 103 (c)(2)(C). Accordingly, Applicants submit that Viscomi is not available as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), as the Assignee of Viscomi and the instant application were parties to a joint research agreement.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Amendment / Request for Reconsideration After Non-Final Rejection — defined 'durability of response' as 12–24 weeks; inv", "docType": "Amendment", "date": "May 15, 2012", "page": "p. 8", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-05-15_A---_Amendment-Request-for-Reconsideration-After-Non-Final-Reject.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-010" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: May 15, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "At the time the present invention was made, the Assignee of the instant application was entered into a joint research agreement with Alfa Wassermann, Sp.A., the Assignee of Viscomi. Applicants have amended the specification as required by 35 U.S.C. § 103 (c)(2)(C). Accordingly, Applicants submit that Viscomi is not ava" }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "law-firm", "name": "Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-fi", "href": null } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-010-1.4", "limitationId": "b", "originalLimitationId": "1.4", "date": "2012-05-15", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "A.3.1", "A.3.1.b", "A.1.6", "A.1.3", "A.5.4" ], "status": "rebuttal", "headline": "Amendment / Request for Reconsideration After Non-Final Rejection — defined 'durability of response' as 12–24 …", "detail": "To overcome §112(2) indefiniteness, Applicants amended claim 74 to recite a durability of response 'comprising from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms', arguing that this clarifies the term 'durability of response' by reference to spec…", "narrative": "

On May 15, 2012, Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP amended the claim, modifying the limitation this element.

To overcome §112(2) indefiniteness, Applicants amended claim 74 to recite a durability of response 'comprising from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms', arguing that this clarifies the term 'durability of response' by reference to spec ¶[0022]. This amendment fixes the meaning of 'durability of response' as a measurable post-treatment window of 'adequate relief of symptoms' — a binding patentee-disclaimer of any reading that does not require a measurable adequate-relief window.

“Claim 74 is amended to recite a method of providing acute treatment for diarrhea-associated Irritable Bowel Syndrome (dIBS) with a durability of response, wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms. Accordingly, Applicants respectfully submit that \"durability of response\" is clearly and unambiguously defined in the claim in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §112.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Amendment / Request for Reconsideration After Non-Final Rejection — defined 'durability of response' as 12–24 weeks; inv", "docType": "Amendment", "date": "May 15, 2012", "page": "p. 7", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-05-15_A---_Amendment-Request-for-Reconsideration-After-Non-Final-Reject.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-010" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: May 15, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "Claim 74 is amended to recite a method of providing acute treatment for diarrhea-associated Irritable Bowel Syndrome (dIBS) with a durability of response, wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms. Accordingly, Applicants respectfully subm" }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "law-firm", "name": "Michael J. DeGrazia, Reg. No. 68,901, McCarter & English, LLP", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-fi", "href": null } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.4" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-011-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2012-08-21", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "A.1.4", "B.1.4", "A.1.6", "B.1.6" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112…", "detail": "§103 obviousness rejection over Viscomi was withdrawn — Applicants' §103(c) joint-research-agreement argument prevailed and Viscomi is no longer available as prior art.", "narrative": "

On Aug 21, 2012, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 issued a Non-Final Rejection mapping this element.

§103 obviousness rejection over Viscomi was withdrawn — Applicants' §103(c) joint-research-agreement argument prevailed and Viscomi is no longer available as prior art.

“Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112(2) on can", "docType": "Office Action Final", "date": "Aug 21, 2012", "page": "p. 3", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-08-21_CTFR_Final-Rejection.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-011" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Aug 21, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/phyllis-g-spivack-art-unit-1629" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-011-1.4", "limitationId": "b", "originalLimitationId": "1.4", "date": "2012-08-21", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "A.1.4", "B.1.4", "A.1.6", "B.1.6" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112…", "detail": "Implicit withdrawal of the prior §112(2) indefiniteness rejection on 'durability of response' itself — the CTFR states 'Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn' and substitutes new §112(1) and §112(2) rejections directed only at the newly added 12–24-week…", "narrative": "

On Aug 21, 2012, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 issued a Non-Final Rejection mapping this element.

Implicit withdrawal of the prior §112(2) indefiniteness rejection on 'durability of response' itself — the CTFR states 'Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn' and substitutes new §112(1) and §112(2) rejections directed only at the newly added 12–24-week range. The base 'durability of response' term is no longer challenged.

“Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn. The following objections and rejections constitute the only objections and rejections presently applied to the pending claims.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112(2) on can", "docType": "Office Action Final", "date": "Aug 21, 2012", "page": "p. 3", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-08-21_CTFR_Final-Rejection.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-011" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Aug 21, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "Rejections set forth in the last Office Action are withdrawn. The following objections and rejections constitute the only objections and rejections presently applied to the pending claims." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/phyllis-g-spivack-art-unit-1629" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.4" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-011-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2012-08-21", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "A.1.4", "B.1.4", "A.1.6", "B.1.6" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112…", "detail": "§112(1) written-description rejection: the new limitation 'wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' (claim 74) and 'wherein the durability of response comprises at least about 12 weeks of…", "narrative": "

On Aug 21, 2012, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 issued a Non-Final Rejection mapping this element.

§112(1) written-description rejection: the new limitation 'wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' (claim 74) and 'wherein the durability of response comprises at least about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' (claim 81) are 'not described in the specification as originally filed.' The Examiner explicitly rejected Applicants' invocation of page 2 line 15 and the page 16-17 paragraph as supporting written description, citing In re Rasmussen.

“The newly added limitation in claim 74 and the recitation in new claim 81, \"wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms\" and \"wherein the durability of response comprises at least about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms,\" respectively, are not described in the specification as originally filed. Applicants refer to the original claims and page 2, line 15, and at the paragraph bridging pages 16-17 of the specification as filed for support. A review of the referenced pages in the specification and the original claims, however, fails to provide clear support for the claims as amended/newly presented. See MPEP 2163.06 and In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212 211 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981).”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Final Rejection — withdrew §112(2) and §103; new §112(1) WD rejection of '12–24 weeks' as new matter; new §112(2) on can", "docType": "Office Action Final", "date": "Aug 21, 2012", "page": "p. 4", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-08-21_CTFR_Final-Rejection.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-011" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Aug 21, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "The newly added limitation in claim 74 and the recitation in new claim 81, \"wherein the durability of response comprises from between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms\" and \"wherein the durability of response comprises at least about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms,\" respectively," }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/phyllis-g-spivack-art-unit-1629" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-012-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2012-09-09", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks and Stehana Patton for Applicants)", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "authority", "authW": 1, "doctrine": [ "B.2.13", "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "A.1.4" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Applicant-initiated interview summary — Sept 5, 2012 in-person interview — agreed to amend to 'about 12 weeks'", "detail": "Pivotal narrowing event: Applicants and Examiner agreed at the September 5, 2012 in-person interview that amending the durability term from 'between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks' down to 'about 12 weeks' would result in withdrawal of the §112(1) written-description…", "narrative": "

On Sep 9, 2012, Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks and Stehana Patton for Applicants) addressed the element via this element.

Pivotal narrowing event: Applicants and Examiner agreed at the September 5, 2012 in-person interview that amending the durability term from 'between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks' down to 'about 12 weeks' would result in withdrawal of the §112(1) written-description rejection. This is the moment the issued claim's outer scope was set — the 12-to-24-week range was surrendered to overcome a §112(a) WD rejection, not as a stylistic edit.

“Applicants initiated an in-person interview to discuss the outstanding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, drawn to new matter. It was agreed an amendment to the independent claims wherein \"the durability of response\" is limited to about 12 weeks, would result in withdrawal of the rejection.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Applicant-initiated interview summary — Sept 5, 2012 in-person interview — agreed to amend to 'about 12 weeks'", "docType": "Interview Summary", "date": "Sep 9, 2012", "page": "p. 2", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-09-09_INTV-SUM-APP_Applicant-Initiated-Interview-Summary-PTOL-413.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-012" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Sep 9, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "Applicants initiated an in-person interview to discuss the outstanding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, drawn to new matter. It was agreed an amendment to the independent claims wherein \"the durability of response\" is limited to about 12 weeks, would result in withdrawal of the rejection." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Phyllis G. Spivack, Art Unit 1629 (with Jonathan M. Sparks and Stehana Patton for Applicants)", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-co", "href": null } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "prosecution-evt-013-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2012-09-11", "venue": "prosecution-us", "party": "Jonathan M. Sparks, Reg. No. 53,624, McCarter & English, LLP", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "A.3.1", "A.1.4" ], "status": "rebuttal", "headline": "Response After Final Action — implements the September 5 interview agreement; amends claim 74 to 'about 12 wee…", "detail": "Implements the September 5 interview agreement: amended claim 74's durability term from 'between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks' to 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief'. This is the operative narrowing amendment that produced the issued limitation 1.5. Festo PHE attaches…", "narrative": "

On Sep 11, 2012, Jonathan M. Sparks, Reg. No. 53,624, McCarter & English, LLP amended the claim, modifying the limitation this element.

Implements the September 5 interview agreement: amended claim 74's durability term from 'between about 12 weeks and about 24 weeks' to 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief'. This is the operative narrowing amendment that produced the issued limitation 1.5. Festo PHE attaches with full force; the surrendered scope (the 12-to-24-week range and any 'at least about 12 weeks' open-ended reading) is barred under argument-based estoppel for any equivalents analysis. Applicants couched the amendment 'in no way acquiescing to the validity of the rejection, and solely in the interest of expediting prosecution', but Festo treats narrowing for any §112 reason as estoppel-triggering regardless of disclaimer-of-acquiescence language.

“As discussed in the interview, claim 74 has been amended to indicate that the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief... Applicants respectfully traverse this rejection. However, while in no way acquiescing to the validity of the rejection, and solely in the interest of expediting prosecution, Applicants have amended claim 74 and cancelled claim 81, as discussed in the interview.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Response After Final Action — implements the September 5 interview agreement; amends claim 74 to 'about 12 weeks'; cance", "docType": "Amendment After Final", "date": "Sep 11, 2012", "page": "p. 3", "app": "USPTO File Wrapper", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/prosecution/2012-09-11_A-NE_Response-After-Final-Action.pdf", "lexdanaId": "PROSECUTION-evt-013" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "office-action", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE", "Application · 12/393,979", "Mailed: Sep 11, 2012" ], "imagePath": null, "caption": "As discussed in the interview, claim 74 has been amended to indicate that the durability of response comprises about 12 weeks of adequate relief... Applicants respectfully traverse this rejection. However, while in no way acquiescing to the validity of the rejection, and solely in the interest of expediting prosecution" }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "law-firm", "name": "Jonathan M. Sparks, Reg. No. 53,624, McCarter & English, LLP", "meta": "", "icon": "ri-fi", "href": null } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-002-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2022-04-28", "venue": "district", "party": "Defendant", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.1.6", "A.1.6.c", "D.3.1", "A.4.1" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Norwich asserted non-infringement for the §271(b) induced theory, arguing that its proposed ANDA label could be carved out under §viii to omit the IBS-D indication, leaving only the HE indication for which the patents were either invalid or otherwise carved out.", "narrative": "

On Apr 28, 2022, Defendant addressed the element via this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Norwich asserted non-infringement for the §271(b) induced theory, arguing that its proposed ANDA label could be carved out under §viii to omit the IBS-D indication, leaving only the HE indication for which the patents were either invalid or otherwise carved out.

“Proposed Findings of Fact by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Post Trial Proposed Findings", "date": "Apr 28, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-04-28_dkt-177_Norwich-Proposed-Findings-of-Fact.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-002" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Apr 28, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-002_lim_1.3.png", "caption": "Proposed Findings of Fact by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Defendant", "meta": "defendant", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/defendant" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-002-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2022-04-28", "venue": "district", "party": "Defendant", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.1.6", "A.1.6.c", "D.3.1", "A.4.1" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Norwich's proposed findings argued that the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief' limitation was anticipated/obvious in light of Pimentel's TARGET-3 trial publications and is invalid for indefiniteness as a term-of-degree without a fixed cutoff. Tied to the prosecution…", "narrative": "

On Apr 28, 2022, Defendant addressed the element via this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Norwich's proposed findings argued that the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief' limitation was anticipated/obvious in light of Pimentel's TARGET-3 trial publications and is invalid for indefiniteness as a term-of-degree without a fixed cutoff. Tied to the prosecution narrowing (Sep 2012) — Norwich invoked the §112(a) WD rationale that 'about 12 weeks' was specifically negotiated to overcome a written-description rejection of '12-24 weeks'.

“Proposed Findings of Fact by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Post Trial Proposed Findings", "date": "Apr 28, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-04-28_dkt-177_Norwich-Proposed-Findings-of-Fact.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-002" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Apr 28, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-002_lim_1.5.png", "caption": "Proposed Findings of Fact by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Defendant", "meta": "defendant", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/defendant" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-003-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2022-06-02", "venue": "district", "party": "Plaintiff", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.2.1", "A.2.4", "D.4.1", "D.4.2", "D.3.1" ], "status": "rebuttal", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Salix proposed findings argued that 'about 12 weeks' has full WD support in the spec at col. 11 ('durability of response' definition) plus Examples 1-3 showing 12-week adequate-relief data — sufficient written-description support under Ariad. Argued Norwich's indefiniteness…", "narrative": "

On Jun 2, 2022, Plaintiff addressed the element via this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Salix proposed findings argued that 'about 12 weeks' has full WD support in the spec at col. 11 ('durability of response' definition) plus Examples 1-3 showing 12-week adequate-relief data — sufficient written-description support under Ariad. Argued Norwich's indefiniteness challenge fails because the spec defines the term operationally.

“Proposed Findings of Fact by AlfaSigma S.p.A., Bausch Health Ireland Ltd., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Post Trial Proposed Findings", "date": "Jun 2, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-06-02_dkt-182_Plaintiffs-Proposed-Findings-of-Fact.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-003" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Jun 2, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-003_lim_1.5.png", "caption": "Proposed Findings of Fact by AlfaSigma S.p.A., Bausch Health Ireland Ltd., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Plaintiff", "meta": "plaintiff", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/plaintiff" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-004-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2022-06-09", "venue": "district", "party": "Defendant", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "challenger", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.1.4", "A.1.6.c", "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "D.3.1" ], "status": "proposed", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Norwich's reply emphasized the prosecution-narrowing argument: that Salix surrendered the 12-to-24-week range during prosecution to overcome the §112(a) WD rejection, so any DOE recapture is barred under Festo. Argued the literal scope of 'about 12 weeks' must be narrow given…", "narrative": "

On Jun 9, 2022, Defendant addressed the element via this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Norwich's reply emphasized the prosecution-narrowing argument: that Salix surrendered the 12-to-24-week range during prosecution to overcome the §112(a) WD rejection, so any DOE recapture is barred under Festo. Argued the literal scope of 'about 12 weeks' must be narrow given that surrender — a binding-on-patentee disclaimer signal.

“REPLY Post-Trial Brief, by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Reply Post Trial Brief", "date": "Jun 9, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-06-09_dkt-185_Norwich-Reply-Post-Trial-Brief.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-004" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Jun 9, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-004_lim_1.5.png", "caption": "REPLY Post-Trial Brief, by Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Defendant", "meta": "defendant", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/defendant" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-005-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2022-06-09", "venue": "district", "party": "Plaintiff", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.2.1", "D.4.1", "D.4.2" ], "status": "rebuttal", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Salix's reply emphasized that the ANDA label specifies 550 mg t.i.d. × 14 days — i.e., the 1650 mg/day × 14 days regimen of claim 1. Induced and §271(e)(2) infringement therefore attach at the filing of Norwich's ANDA notwithstanding any post-judgment label amendment Norwich…", "narrative": "

On Jun 9, 2022, Plaintiff addressed the element via this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Salix's reply emphasized that the ANDA label specifies 550 mg t.i.d. × 14 days — i.e., the 1650 mg/day × 14 days regimen of claim 1. Induced and §271(e)(2) infringement therefore attach at the filing of Norwich's ANDA notwithstanding any post-judgment label amendment Norwich might attempt.

“POST-Trial Reply Brief, by AlfaSigma S.p.A., Bausch Health Ireland Ltd., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.”

", "binding": "", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Reply Post Trial Brief", "date": "Jun 9, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-06-09_dkt-186_Plaintiffs-Post-Trial-Reply-Brief.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-005" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Jun 9, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-005_lim_1.3.png", "caption": "POST-Trial Reply Brief, by AlfaSigma S.p.A., Bausch Health Ireland Ltd., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Plaintiff", "meta": "plaintiff", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/plaintiff" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2022-08-10", "venue": "district", "party": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "authority", "authW": 3, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.1.6", "A.2.1", "A.2.4", "D.3.1", "D.4.1", "D.4.2", "D.6.10" ], "status": "accepted", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Court found that Norwich's ANDA (No. 214369), which proposes a 550 mg t.i.d. × 14-day rifaximin regimen indicated for treatment of IBS-D, would induce infringement of claim 1's 'administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days' limitation under §271(b) and infringes under…", "narrative": "

On Aug 10, 2022, Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews issued an opinion holding this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Court found that Norwich's ANDA (No. 214369), which proposes a 550 mg t.i.d. × 14-day rifaximin regimen indicated for treatment of IBS-D, would induce infringement of claim 1's 'administering 1650 mg/day of rifaximin for 14 days' limitation under §271(b) and infringes under §271(e)(2). Norwich's section viii carve-out gambit (later vacated by the CAFC) was rejected.

“TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022.”

", "binding": "cascade", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Trial Opinion", "date": "Aug 10, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-08-10_dkt-191_TRIAL-OPINION-bench-trial-findings.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-006" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Aug 10, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-006_lim_1.3.png", "caption": "TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "meta": "court", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/court-richard-g-andrews" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "role": "authority", "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.3" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006-1.4", "limitationId": "b", "originalLimitationId": "1.4", "date": "2022-08-10", "venue": "district", "party": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "authority", "authW": 3, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.1.6", "A.2.1", "A.2.4", "D.3.1", "D.4.1", "D.4.2", "D.6.10" ], "status": "accepted", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Court rejected Norwich's invalidity attacks on the post-treatment 'durability of response' limitation. Norwich's §103 obviousness theory failed; the spec's definition (col. 11 of US 8,309,569) was held to define the term operationally for §112(b) purposes.", "narrative": "

On Aug 10, 2022, Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews issued an opinion holding this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Court rejected Norwich's invalidity attacks on the post-treatment 'durability of response' limitation. Norwich's §103 obviousness theory failed; the spec's definition (col. 11 of US 8,309,569) was held to define the term operationally for §112(b) purposes.

“TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022.”

", "binding": "cascade", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Trial Opinion", "date": "Aug 10, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-08-10_dkt-191_TRIAL-OPINION-bench-trial-findings.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-006" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Aug 10, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-006_lim_1.4.png", "caption": "TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "meta": "court", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/court-richard-g-andrews" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "role": "authority", "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.4" ] }, { "id": "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006-1.5", "limitationId": "c", "originalLimitationId": "1.5", "date": "2022-08-10", "venue": "district", "party": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "authority", "authW": 3, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.1.6", "A.2.1", "A.2.4", "D.3.1", "D.4.1", "D.4.2", "D.6.10" ], "status": "accepted", "headline": "Event — 1-2020-cv-00430", "detail": "Court rejected Norwich's §112(a) written-description and §112(b) indefiniteness attacks on the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' limitation. Found WD support in the spec's durability-of-response definition (col. 11) plus Examples; rejected indefiniteness on a…", "narrative": "

On Aug 10, 2022, Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews issued an opinion holding this element in 1-2020-cv-00430.

Court rejected Norwich's §112(a) written-description and §112(b) indefiniteness attacks on the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' limitation. Found WD support in the spec's durability-of-response definition (col. 11) plus Examples; rejected indefiniteness on a Nautilus reasonable-certainty analysis. The IBS-D method patents (including claim 1 of US 8,309,569) were held valid and infringed.

“TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022.”

", "binding": "cascade", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Trial Opinion", "date": "Aug 10, 2022", "page": "p. 1", "app": "1-2020-cv-00430", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/1-2020-cv-00430/2022-08-10_dkt-191_TRIAL-OPINION-bench-trial-findings.pdf", "lexdanaId": "1-2020-CV-00430-evt-006" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals, Inc.", "Aug 10, 2022" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/1-2020-cv-00430/claim_1_evt-006_lim_1.5.png", "caption": "TRIAL OPINION for bench trial held March 21 through March 25, 2022. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/10/2022." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Court — Hon. Richard G. Andrews", "meta": "court", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/court-richard-g-andrews" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "role": "authority", "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] }, { "id": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001-1.3", "limitationId": "a", "originalLimitationId": "1.3", "date": "2024-04-11", "venue": "cafc", "party": "Court", "partyHref": null, "partyType": "patent-owner", "authW": 0, "doctrine": [ "A.1.3", "A.1.4", "A.2.1", "A.2.4", "A.3.2", "A.3.2.d", "D.4.1", "D.6.10", "E.2.1", "E.2.2", "E.2.4" ], "status": "accepted", "headline": "Event — CAFC-22-2153", "detail": "Affirmed D.Del. holding that Norwich's ANDA infringes claim 1 of US 8,309,569 under §271(e)(2). Court rejected Norwich's section viii carve-out / post-judgment label-amendment theory. Important precedent: a Hatch-Waxman §271(e)(2) infringement determination is fixed at ANDA…", "narrative": "

On Apr 11, 2024, Court issued an opinion holding this element in CAFC-22-2153.

Affirmed D.Del. holding that Norwich's ANDA infringes claim 1 of US 8,309,569 under §271(e)(2). Court rejected Norwich's section viii carve-out / post-judgment label-amendment theory. Important precedent: a Hatch-Waxman §271(e)(2) infringement determination is fixed at ANDA filing; later label amendments do not unwind the infringement.

“Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., 98 F.4th 1056 (Fed. Cir. 2024) — combined opinion of the court.”

On Apr 11, 2024, Court issued an opinion holding this element in CAFC-22-2153.

Affirmed validity of the 'durability of response' term over Norwich's §103, §112(a), and §112(b) attacks.

“Salix v. Norwich, 98 F.4th 1056 (Fed. Cir. 2024).”

On Apr 11, 2024, Court issued an opinion holding this element in CAFC-22-2153.

Affirmed validity of 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief'. Spec's durability-of-response definition (col. 11) plus example data sufficient for §112(a) WD; not indefinite under Nautilus reasonable-certainty standard. The September 2012 narrowing amendment created Festo PHE but did not preclude literal infringement.

“Salix v. Norwich, 98 F.4th 1056 (Fed. Cir. 2024).”

", "binding": "cascade", "cite": { "doc": "Event", "docType": "Cafc Opinion Precedential", "date": "Apr 11, 2024", "page": "p. 1", "app": "CAFC-22-2153", "pdfUrl": "pdfs/CAFC-22-2153/2024-04-11_CAFC-22-2153_Salix-v-Norwich-OPINION.pdf", "lexdanaId": "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001" }, "excerpt": { "kind": "order", "letterhead": [ "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS", "FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT", "Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc. · Apr 11, 2024" ], "imagePath": "snapshots/CAFC-22-2153/claim_1_evt-001_lim_1.5.png", "caption": "Salix v. Norwich, 98 F.4th 1056 (Fed. Cir. 2024)." }, "related": { "entities": [ { "type": "company", "name": "Court", "meta": "court", "icon": "ri-co", "href": "https://app.lexdana.ai/company/court" } ], "priorArt": [] }, "role": "authority", "touchedSubLimitations": [ "1.5" ] } ]; const SYNTHESIS = { "a": { "meaning": "Federal Circuit affirmed infringement of claim 1 by Norwich's ANDA. The court rejected Norwich's argument that a post-judgment amendment to its ANDA label (carving out the IBS-D indication under §viii of Hatch-Waxman) could moot the §271(e)(2) infringement liability that attached at the time the original ANDA was filed. Holding: the statute fixes liability at ANDA filing; post-judgment carve-outs do not retroactively cure infringement.", "bindingAuthority": "CAFC 22-2153", "bindingMeta": "", "constraints": [ "1-2020-cv-00430: Court found, based on Norwich's ANDA label specifying 550 mg t.i.d. (= 1650 mg/day) for 14 days for the IBS-D indication, that this limitation would be met if Norwich's ANDA product is administered as labeled. Induced infringement under § 271(b) flows from Norwich's proposed label; § 271(e)(2) infringement attaches at filing of the ANDA.", "CAFC-22-2153: Federal Circuit affirmed infringement of claim 1 by Norwich's ANDA. The court rejected Norwich's argument that a post-judgment amendment to its ANDA label (carving out the IBS-D indication under §viii of Hatch-Waxman) could moot the §271(e)(2) infringement liability that attached at the time the original ANDA was filed. Holding: the statute fixes liability at ANDA filing; post-judgment carve-outs do not retroactively cure infringement." ], "coverage": "Prosecution complete (15 events) · 3 D.Ct. matters · 1 CAFC matter" }, "b": { "meaning": "CAFC affirmed validity. Norwich's §103 obviousness, §112(a) WD, and §112(b) indefiniteness challenges to 'durability of response' all failed.", "bindingAuthority": "CAFC 22-2153", "bindingMeta": "", "constraints": [ "1-2020-cv-00430: Court treated 'durability of response' as having its plain and ordinary meaning informed by the spec's definition (col. 11). Norwich's invalidity attacks (§§ 102, 103, 112) on the IBS-D patents were rejected at trial. Limitation deemed met by treatment with Norwich's ANDA product as labeled.", "CAFC-22-2153: CAFC affirmed validity. Norwich's §103 obviousness, §112(a) WD, and §112(b) indefiniteness challenges to 'durability of response' all failed." ], "coverage": "Prosecution complete (15 events) · 3 D.Ct. matters · 1 CAFC matter" }, "c": { "meaning": "CAFC affirmed validity over Norwich's §112(a) WD challenge to the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief' limitation. The court accepted that the spec's durability-of-response definition (col. 11) plus Examples provide adequate WD support for the species, even though the species was added by the September 2012 amendment after the in-person interview. Festo PHE attaches but did not prevent literal infringement here.", "bindingAuthority": "CAFC 22-2153", "bindingMeta": "", "constraints": [ "1-2020-cv-00430: Court found the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief of symptoms' limitation valid (over Norwich's §112 written-description, enablement, and indefiniteness challenges) and inherently infringed by Norwich's labeled use. Norwich argued the term-of-degree was indefinite given its narrow prosecution-history origin (§112(a) WD rejection overcome only by the September 2012 'about 12 weeks' amendment), but court rejected the indefiniteness theory. Festo PHE applies to any equivalents analysis; literal infringement found.", "CAFC-22-2153: CAFC affirmed validity over Norwich's §112(a) WD challenge to the 'about 12 weeks of adequate relief' limitation. The court accepted that the spec's durability-of-response definition (col. 11) plus Examples provide adequate WD support for the species, even though the species was added by the September 2012 amendment after the in-person interview. Festo PHE attaches but did not prevent literal infringement here." ], "coverage": "Prosecution complete (15 events) · 3 D.Ct. matters · 1 CAFC matter" } }; /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ STATE ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ const state = { activeLim:'a', activeVersion:'v5', activeStep:'v5', /* tracks the visually-selected lifecycle item — version id ('v0'..'v5') or ruling id ('r1') */ activeCite:null, activeSpecAnchor:null, filters:{ party: new Set(['patent-owner','challenger','authority']), venue: new Set(VENUES.filter(v=>v.available).map(v=>v.id)), doctrine: new Set(DOCTRINES.map(d=>d.id)) } }; /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ HELPERS ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function venueLabel(id){const v=VENUES.find(x=>x.id===id);return v?v.label:id;} function venueShort(id){const v=VENUES.find(x=>x.id===id);return v?v.short:id;} function venueClass(id){const v=VENUES.find(x=>x.id===id);return v?v.vclass:'';} function doctrineLabel(id){const d=DOCTRINES.find(x=>x.id===id);return d?d.label:id;} function fmtDate(iso){ const [y,m,d]=iso.split('-'); const mn=['','Jan','Feb','Mar','Apr','May','Jun','Jul','Aug','Sep','Oct','Nov','Dec']; return `${mn[+m]} ${+d}, ${y}`; } function fmtDateMD(iso){ const [y,m,d]=iso.split('-'); const mn=['','Jan','Feb','Mar','Apr','May','Jun','Jul','Aug','Sep','Oct','Nov','Dec']; return `${mn[+m]} ${+d}
${y}`; } /* ─── v6.2: role classification by FUNCTION (not by who) ─── Three roles for the swimlane: 'owner' → patent owner / applicant — left lane 'challenger' → anyone arguing against the claim's current scope — right lane 'authority' → final ruler at this stage — on the spine The same entity can wear different hats. An examiner rejecting an application is functionally a challenger; the same examiner allowing it is an authority. Rule: a position is an authority/ruling iff its matching event is flagged isRuling=true OR it is administrative closure (partyType=authority + no doctrines). */ function getRole(p){ if (p.role) return p.role; const ev = (typeof EVENTS !== 'undefined') ? EVENTS.find(e => e.positionId === p.id) : null; if (ev && ev.isRuling) return 'authority'; if (p.partyType === 'authority') { // Authority entity but functioning as a challenger (rejection/objection) if ((p.doctrine || []).length > 0) return 'challenger'; return 'authority'; // administrative closure, no doctrine pushback } if (p.partyType === 'patent-owner') return 'owner'; if (p.partyType === 'challenger') return 'challenger'; return 'owner'; } /* Venue-specific party label shown on hover. Lets us keep the 3-role taxonomy simple in the visual while still surfacing precise terminology when needed. */ function venueRoleLabel(role, venue){ if (role === 'owner') { if (venue === 'district' || venue === 'cafc') return 'Plaintiff / Patent Owner'; if (venue === 'itc') return 'Complainant'; return 'Patent Owner / Applicant'; } if (role === 'challenger') { if (venue === 'prosecution-us' || venue === 'prosecution-ep') return 'Examiner (rejecting)'; if (venue === 'ipr') return 'IPR Petitioner'; if (venue === 'district') return 'Defendant'; if (venue === 'cafc') return 'Appellant'; if (venue === 'itc') return 'Respondent'; return 'Challenger'; } if (role === 'authority') { if (venue === 'prosecution-us' || venue === 'prosecution-ep') return 'Examiner (ruling)'; if (venue === 'ipr') return 'PTAB / Director'; if (venue === 'district') return 'District Court'; if (venue === 'cafc') return 'CAFC Panel'; if (venue === 'itc') return 'ITC ALJ / Commission'; return 'Authority'; } return role; } /* Mapping: which matter events caused / constitute each lifecycle step. Used to highlight events on the left timeline when a version/ruling is active. For VLSI: v0 is the spec anchor (no events); v1–v4 trace prosecution; v5 is issuance; r1 is the W.D. Tex. verdict; r2 is the PTAB FWD. The two CAFC appeal-filing events are not yet "rulings" — they appear in the swimlane only and feed the PENDING capstone. */ const STEP_EVENTS = { "v0": [], "v1": [ "prosecution-evt-001" ], "v2": [ "prosecution-evt-008" ], "v3": [ "prosecution-evt-002" ], "v4": [ "prosecution-evt-015" ], "v5": [ "evo-evt-015" ], "r1": [ "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-001", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-002", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-003", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-004", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-005", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-006", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-007", "1-2020-cv-00430-evt-008" ], "r2": [ "CAFC-22-2153-evt-001" ] }; /* v6.4: stepper compression — versions where claim text didn't change collapse into one stepper node. Rationale: the stepper visualizes claim STATE, and if state didn't change, three nodes look identical and add visual noise. Always-distinct: V0 (anchor), V1 (filed), any version with isIssued=true, and any ruling. Only intermediate versions with identical claim text and identical preamble can compress. Output: array of step descriptors: { kind:'single', id, versionIds:[...], date, label } { kind:'compressed', id:'v2-v3-v4', versionIds:[...], startDate, endDate, label } */ function computeCompressedSteps(){ const steps = []; const sameText = (a, b) => JSON.stringify(a.lims) === JSON.stringify(b.lims) && a.preamble === b.preamble; let i = 0; while (i < CLAIM_VERSIONS.length) { const v = CLAIM_VERSIONS[i]; const alwaysSingle = v.isAnchor || v.id === 'v1' || v.isIssued; if (alwaysSingle) { steps.push({ kind:'single', id: v.id, versionIds: [v.id], date: v.date, version: v }); i++; continue; } // Try to extend the run let j = i; while (j + 1 < CLAIM_VERSIONS.length) { const next = CLAIM_VERSIONS[j+1]; if (next.isAnchor || next.id === 'v1' || next.isIssued) break; if (!sameText(CLAIM_VERSIONS[j], next)) break; j++; } if (j === i) { steps.push({ kind:'single', id: v.id, versionIds: [v.id], date: v.date, version: v }); } else { const ids = CLAIM_VERSIONS.slice(i, j+1).map(x => x.id); steps.push({ kind: 'compressed', id: ids.join('-'), versionIds: ids, startDate: CLAIM_VERSIONS[i].date, endDate: CLAIM_VERSIONS[j].date }); } i = j + 1; } return steps; } /* Resolve a stepId (single or compressed) to the union of its event IDs. */ function getEventIdsForStep(stepId){ if (!stepId) return []; if (STEP_EVENTS[stepId]) return STEP_EVENTS[stepId]; if (stepId.includes('-')) { const parts = stepId.split('-'); const out = []; parts.forEach(p => (STEP_EVENTS[p] || []).forEach(e => out.push(e))); return out; } return []; } /* v6.3: which claim elements does the active version actually affect? A version affects element X if any of its events has positions in element X. */ function getElementsAffectedByStep(stepId){ const evIds = getEventIdsForStep(stepId); if (evIds.length === 0) return new Set(LIMITATIONS.map(l => l.id)); // V0 baseline = all const evs = EVENTS.filter(e => evIds.includes(e.id)); const affected = new Set(); evs.forEach(ev => { POSITIONS.forEach(p => { if (p.date === ev.date && p.venue === ev.venue) affected.add(p.limitationId); }); }); return affected; } /* v6.3: which elements does this single position implicate? Computed from sibling positions sharing date+venue+party (multi-element arguments like Hoxie's §103(c) argument get filed as N parallel position records). */ function getCoveredElements(p){ const partyKey = (p.party || '').replace(/<[^>]+>/g,''); const siblings = POSITIONS.filter(q => q.date === p.date && q.venue === p.venue && (q.party || '').replace(/<[^>]+>/g,'') === partyKey ); const set = new Set(siblings.map(q => q.limitationId)); if (set.size === 0) set.add(p.limitationId); return set; } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Horizontal timeline ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function renderHTimeline(){ const track = document.getElementById('htl-track'); // Clear existing dots track.querySelectorAll('.htl-dot, .htl-yr').forEach(el => el.remove()); const minD = new Date('2008-08-01').getTime(); const maxD = new Date('2026-04-01').getTime(); const span = maxD - minD; EVENTS.forEach(ev => { const t = new Date(ev.date).getTime(); const pct = ((t - minD) / span) * 100; const dot = document.createElement('div'); dot.className = 'htl-dot' + (ev.isRuling ? ' ruling' : ''); if (ev.isRuling && ev.outcome === 'petitioner-favorable') dot.classList.add('adverse'); // Center: ruling diamonds are 15px, regular dots are 13px const halfW = ev.isRuling ? 7.5 : 6.5; dot.style.left = 'calc(' + pct + '% - ' + halfW + 'px)'; dot.dataset.eventId = ev.id; dot.dataset.venue = ev.venue; if (ev.isRuling && ev.positionId) dot.dataset.positionId = ev.positionId; // Filter dim: if venue not active in filters, dim if (!state.filters.venue.has(ev.venue)) dot.classList.add('dim'); // Inner shape element (so tooltip can stay un-rotated for ruling diamonds) const shape = document.createElement('div'); shape.className = 'htl-dot-shape'; if (!ev.isRuling) { shape.style.borderColor = ev.color; } dot.appendChild(shape); const tip = document.createElement('div'); tip.className = 'htl-tip'; const tipPrefix = ev.isRuling ? '◆ ' : ''; tip.innerHTML = `${tipPrefix}${ev.title}${ev.sub} · ${fmtDate(ev.date)}`; dot.appendChild(tip); dot.addEventListener('click', () => { // Scroll the side mini-timeline to this event const item = document.querySelector(`.mvtl-item[data-event-id="${ev.id}"]`); if (item) item.scrollIntoView({ behavior:'smooth', block:'center' }); // Highlight briefly document.querySelectorAll('.htl-dot.active').forEach(d => d.classList.remove('active')); dot.classList.add('active'); setTimeout(() => dot.classList.remove('active'), 2000); // If a ruling with linked positionId, open citation in right panel if (ev.isRuling && ev.positionId) { const pos = POSITIONS.find(p => p.id === ev.positionId); if (pos) { if (pos.limitationId !== state.activeLim) setActiveLim(pos.limitationId); if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { state.activeVersion = 'v5'; state.activeStep = 'v5'; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); } showCitation(ev.positionId); return; } } // For non-ruling events: scroll the main position trail to a card matching this date // (within the active limitation). If no match, do nothing extra. if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { // Spec-anchor mode has no position cards — switch out to V5 first state.activeVersion = 'v5'; state.activeStep = 'v5'; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); } const matchedPos = POSITIONS.find(p => p.limitationId === state.activeLim && p.date === ev.date ); if (matchedPos) { const card = document.querySelector(`.swim-card[data-pos-id="${matchedPos.id}"], .pos[data-pos-id="${matchedPos.id}"]`); if (card) { card.scrollIntoView({ behavior:'smooth', block:'center' }); card.classList.remove('jumped-to'); void card.offsetWidth; card.classList.add('jumped-to'); setTimeout(() => card.classList.remove('jumped-to'), 1600); } } }); track.appendChild(dot); }); // Year markers [2009, 2011, 2012, 2025, 2026].forEach(y => { const t = new Date(y + '-01-01').getTime(); const pct = ((t - minD) / span) * 100; const yr = document.createElement('div'); yr.className = 'htl-yr'; yr.style.left = pct + '%'; yr.textContent = y; track.appendChild(yr); }); } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Mini vertical timeline (left column) ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function renderMiniTimeline(){ const wrap = document.getElementById('mvtl'); wrap.innerHTML = ''; EVENTS.forEach(ev => { const item = document.createElement('div'); const vCls = ev.venue === 'prosecution-us' ? 'v-pros' : ev.venue === 'ipr' ? 'v-ipr' : ev.venue === 'itc' ? 'v-itc' : ev.venue === 'district' ? 'v-dct' : ev.venue === 'cafc' ? 'v-cafc' : 'v-filing'; item.className = `mvtl-item ${vCls} clickable`; item.dataset.eventId = ev.id; item.title = `Click to jump to first card for this event`; item.innerHTML = `

${fmtDate(ev.date)}

${ev.title}

${ev.sub}

`; // v6.2: click → jump to first position card matching this event. // Strategy: find positions whose date+venue match. Prefer one in the active // limitation; otherwise pick the first found and switch active limitation to it. item.addEventListener('click', () => { const matches = POSITIONS .filter(p => p.date === ev.date && p.venue === ev.venue) .sort((a,b) => a.limitationId.localeCompare(b.limitationId)); if (matches.length === 0) { // Soft visual feedback: brief flash on the event itself item.classList.remove('jumped-to'); void item.offsetWidth; item.classList.add('jumped-to'); setTimeout(() => item.classList.remove('jumped-to'), 1600); return; } const inActive = matches.find(p => p.limitationId === state.activeLim); const target = inActive || matches[0]; // If V0 mode (spec-anchor view) → switch to V5 so positions are visible if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { state.activeVersion = 'v5'; state.activeStep = 'v5'; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); } if (target.limitationId !== state.activeLim) { setActiveLim(target.limitationId); } else { renderTrail(); } // Wait for trail to render, then scroll to and flash the card setTimeout(() => { const card = document.querySelector( `.swim-card[data-pos-id="${target.id}"], .swim-au-bar[data-pos-id="${target.id}"]` ); if (card) { card.scrollIntoView({ behavior: 'smooth', block: 'center' }); card.classList.remove('jumped-to'); void card.offsetWidth; card.classList.add('jumped-to'); setTimeout(() => card.classList.remove('jumped-to'), 1600); } }, 30); }); wrap.appendChild(item); }); // Apply current step-event highlight applyStepEventHighlight(); } /* v6.2: highlight the matter-timeline events that caused the active step. v6.3: also scroll the first highlighted item into view in the left column. */ function applyStepEventHighlight(){ const stepId = state.activeStep || state.activeVersion; const ids = getEventIdsForStep(stepId); let firstHighlight = null; document.querySelectorAll('#mvtl .mvtl-item').forEach(el => { const isHi = ids.includes(el.dataset.eventId); el.classList.toggle('highlighted', isHi); if (isHi && !firstHighlight) firstHighlight = el; }); if (firstHighlight) { // Scroll within the left column container so user sees the highlighted events const container = document.querySelector('.col-left') || document.querySelector('.col'); if (container && typeof container.scrollBy === 'function') { const cRect = container.getBoundingClientRect(); const eRect = firstHighlight.getBoundingClientRect(); // Only scroll if the element is outside the visible area if (eRect.top < cRect.top + 40 || eRect.bottom > cRect.bottom - 40) { const offset = eRect.top - cRect.top - 80; // leave headroom container.scrollBy({ top: offset, behavior: 'smooth' }); } } } } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ HELPERS — Filter chip match counts + jump navigation ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ /* Count how many positions for the active limitation match a single filter value. Used for hover tooltips and jump-arrow eligibility. */ function countMatching(kind, value){ const positions = POSITIONS.filter(p => p.limitationId === state.activeLim); return positions.filter(p => { if (kind === 'party') return p.partyType === value; if (kind === 'venue') return p.venue === value; if (kind === 'doctrine') return p.doctrine.includes(value); return false; }); } /* Chip hover tooltip text — explains what the filter does + the hold-to-jump hint. */ function chipTooltipText(kind, value, label, available){ const matches = available === false ? [] : countMatching(kind, value); const n = matches.length; let main; if (available === false) { main = label + ' — no data for this matter'; } else if (n === 0) { main = label + ' — 0 positions'; } else { main = label + ' — ' + n + ' position' + (n === 1 ? '' : 's'); } const hold = (available !== false && n > 0) ? `` : ''; return ``; } /* Jump-icon HTML for chips with ≤ 2 matches. */ function chipJumpIcon(kind, value, available){ if (available === false) return ''; const n = countMatching(kind, value).length; return n > 0 && n <= 2 ? '↗' : ''; } /* Long-press detection state (per-chip). */ const HOLD_THRESHOLD_MS = 350; let _holdTimer = null; let _holdChip = null; let _holdFired = false; function attachChipPress(btn, kind, value, available){ if (available === false) return; // Pointerdown starts a hold timer; if it elapses, we trigger jump and skip the toggle. btn.addEventListener('pointerdown', (e) => { if (e.button !== undefined && e.button !== 0) return; _holdFired = false; _holdChip = btn; btn.classList.add('long-pressing'); _holdTimer = setTimeout(() => { _holdFired = true; btn.classList.remove('long-pressing'); jumpToFilter(kind, value); }, HOLD_THRESHOLD_MS); }); const cancelHold = () => { if (_holdTimer) { clearTimeout(_holdTimer); _holdTimer = null; } if (_holdChip) { _holdChip.classList.remove('long-pressing'); _holdChip = null; } }; btn.addEventListener('pointerup', cancelHold); btn.addEventListener('pointerleave', cancelHold); btn.addEventListener('pointercancel', cancelHold); // Click — only fire toggle if we DIDN'T just trigger a jump. btn.addEventListener('click', (e) => { if (_holdFired) { _holdFired = false; e.preventDefault(); e.stopPropagation(); return; } // If chip has the jump-arrow (≤2 matches) AND click is on the arrow, jump instead of toggle. if (e.target && e.target.classList && e.target.classList.contains('chip-jump')) { e.preventDefault(); jumpToFilter(kind, value); return; } toggleFilter(kind, value); }); } /* Jump to the first position matching this single filter value, regardless of current filter state. Pulses the matching htl-dots and flashes the position card. */ function jumpToFilter(kind, value){ const matches = countMatching(kind, value); if (matches.length === 0) return; // Make sure we're not in V0 mode (no positions visible there). if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { state.activeVersion = 'v5'; state.activeStep = 'v5'; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); } // Make sure the relevant filters allow this match through. We don't change user's // filter state aggressively — instead we ensure the value being jumped to is enabled. // (If user has already disabled it, the jump implicitly enables it.) let filtersChanged = false; if (kind === 'venue' && !state.filters.venue.has(value)) { state.filters.venue.add(value); filtersChanged = true; } if (kind === 'doctrine' && !state.filters.doctrine.has(value)) { state.filters.doctrine.add(value); filtersChanged = true; } if (kind === 'party' && !state.filters.party.has(value)) { state.filters.party.add(value); filtersChanged = true; } if (filtersChanged) { renderVenueChips(); renderDoctrineChips(); document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { btn.classList.toggle('active', state.filters.party.has(btn.dataset.value)); }); renderTrail(); renderHTimeline(); } // Find first matching position card in DOM order const filtered = getFilteredPositions(); const firstMatch = filtered.find(p => { if (kind === 'party') return p.partyType === value; if (kind === 'venue') return p.venue === value; if (kind === 'doctrine') return p.doctrine.includes(value); return false; }); if (!firstMatch) return; const card = document.querySelector(`.swim-card[data-pos-id="${firstMatch.id}"], .pos[data-pos-id="${firstMatch.id}"]`); if (card) { card.scrollIntoView({ behavior: 'smooth', block: 'center' }); card.classList.remove('jumped-to'); void card.offsetWidth; // force reflow to restart animation card.classList.add('jumped-to'); setTimeout(() => card.classList.remove('jumped-to'), 1600); } // Emphasize all matching htl-dots applyMatchEmphasis(kind, value); } /* Add 'match-emphasis' class to all htl-dots whose events match the given filter value. Auto-fades after 2.5 seconds. */ let _emphasisTimer = null; function applyMatchEmphasis(kind, value){ if (_emphasisTimer) clearTimeout(_emphasisTimer); document.querySelectorAll('.htl-dot.match-emphasis').forEach(d => d.classList.remove('match-emphasis')); const dots = document.querySelectorAll('.htl-dot'); dots.forEach(dot => { const evId = dot.dataset.eventId; const ev = EVENTS.find(e => e.id === evId); if (!ev) return; let matches = false; if (kind === 'venue') matches = ev.venue === value; if (kind === 'doctrine') { // Match doctrine via the linked position if the event has one if (ev.positionId) { const pos = POSITIONS.find(p => p.id === ev.positionId); matches = pos && pos.doctrine.includes(value); } } if (kind === 'party') { if (ev.positionId) { const pos = POSITIONS.find(p => p.id === ev.positionId); matches = pos && pos.partyType === value; } } if (matches) dot.classList.add('match-emphasis'); }); _emphasisTimer = setTimeout(() => { document.querySelectorAll('.htl-dot.match-emphasis').forEach(d => d.classList.remove('match-emphasis')); }, 2500); } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Filter chips ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function renderVenueChips(){ const wrap = document.getElementById('venue-chips'); wrap.innerHTML = ''; VENUES.forEach(v => { const btn = document.createElement('button'); const isActive = state.filters.venue.has(v.id); btn.className = 'chip tooltip-below' + (isActive ? ' active' : '') + (!v.available ? ' unavail' : ''); btn.dataset.value = v.id; btn.innerHTML = v.label + chipJumpIcon('venue', v.id, v.available) + chipTooltipText('venue', v.id, v.label, v.available); attachChipPress(btn, 'venue', v.id, v.available); wrap.appendChild(btn); }); } function renderDoctrineChips(){ const wrap = document.getElementById('doctrine-chips'); wrap.innerHTML = ''; // v6.2: only show doctrines that have at least one position in the active matter. // The unused ones are tucked behind a "+N not present" disclosure stub so // users still see what we considered and rejected. const usedSet = new Set(); POSITIONS.forEach(p => (p.doctrine || []).forEach(d => usedSet.add(d))); const used = DOCTRINES.filter(d => usedSet.has(d.id)); const unused = DOCTRINES.filter(d => !usedSet.has(d.id)); used.forEach(d => { const btn = document.createElement('button'); const isActive = state.filters.doctrine.has(d.id); btn.className = 'chip' + (isActive ? ' active' : ''); btn.dataset.value = d.id; btn.innerHTML = d.label + chipJumpIcon('doctrine', d.id, true) + chipTooltipText('doctrine', d.id, d.label, true); attachChipPress(btn, 'doctrine', d.id, true); wrap.appendChild(btn); }); if (unused.length > 0) { const stub = document.createElement('button'); stub.className = 'chip doc-stub'; stub.dataset.expanded = '0'; stub.innerHTML = `+${unused.length} not present`; stub.title = 'Doctrines considered but not present in this matter — click to reveal'; stub.addEventListener('click', (e) => { e.stopPropagation(); const expanded = stub.dataset.expanded === '1'; // Toggle: when expanded, show inactive chips after the stub; when collapsed, remove them if (expanded) { document.querySelectorAll('#doctrine-chips .doc-inactive').forEach(el => el.remove()); stub.dataset.expanded = '0'; stub.innerHTML = `+${unused.length} not present`; } else { unused.forEach(d => { const ic = document.createElement('span'); ic.className = 'chip doc-inactive'; ic.textContent = d.label; ic.title = `${d.label} — no positions in this matter`; wrap.appendChild(ic); }); stub.dataset.expanded = '1'; stub.innerHTML = `− hide unused`; } }); wrap.appendChild(stub); } } function wirePartyChips(){ document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { const v = btn.dataset.value; const labels = { 'patent-owner':'Patent Owner', 'challenger':'Challenger', 'authority':'Authority' }; // Inject the tooltip + jump icon (this runs once at boot) btn.innerHTML = labels[v] + chipJumpIcon('party', v, true) + chipTooltipText('party', v, labels[v], true); attachChipPress(btn, 'party', v, true); }); } /* Re-render party-chip tooltips whenever active limitation changes (counts depend on it). */ function refreshPartyChipTooltips(){ document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { const v = btn.dataset.value; const labels = { 'patent-owner':'Patent Owner', 'challenger':'Challenger', 'authority':'Authority' }; btn.innerHTML = labels[v] + chipJumpIcon('party', v, true) + chipTooltipText('party', v, labels[v], true); }); // Re-attach press handlers since innerHTML wiped them document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { const v = btn.dataset.value; attachChipPress(btn, 'party', v, true); }); } function wireResetActions(){ document.querySelectorAll('[data-reset]').forEach(el => { el.addEventListener('click', () => { const w = el.dataset.reset; if (w === 'party') state.filters.party = new Set(['patent-owner','challenger','authority']); else if (w === 'venue') state.filters.venue = new Set(VENUES.filter(v=>v.available).map(v=>v.id)); else if (w === 'doctrine') state.filters.doctrine = new Set(DOCTRINES.map(d=>d.id)); renderVenueChips(); renderDoctrineChips(); document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { btn.classList.toggle('active', state.filters.party.has(btn.dataset.value)); }); renderTrail(); renderHTimeline(); }); }); } function toggleFilter(kind, value){ const set = state.filters[kind]; if (set.has(value)) set.delete(value); else set.add(value); if (kind === 'party') { document.querySelectorAll('#party-chips .chip').forEach(btn => { btn.classList.toggle('active', state.filters.party.has(btn.dataset.value)); }); } else if (kind === 'venue') { renderVenueChips(); } else if (kind === 'doctrine') { renderDoctrineChips(); } renderTrail(); renderHTimeline(); } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Claim canvas (claim text + version selector + limitations) ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Visual claim version stepper + claim text with diffs ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function renderVersionStepper(){ const track = document.getElementById('cv-track'); track.innerHTML = ''; // v6.4: compute compressed step list (text-identical adjacent versions collapse) const compressedSteps = computeCompressedSteps(); const nVersionSlots = compressedSteps.length; const nRulings = RULINGS.length; // Dynamic grid: N version slots + 0.5fr spacer + N ruling slots track.style.gridTemplateColumns = `repeat(${nVersionSlots}, 1fr) 0.5fr repeat(${nRulings}, 1fr)`; // Backing line const line = document.createElement('div'); line.className = 'cv-line'; track.appendChild(line); // Layout math — version step centers based on dynamic count const totalUnits = nVersionSlots + 0.5 + nRulings; const stepUnit = 90 / totalUnits; const stepCenter = i => 5 + (i + 0.5) * stepUnit; // Each ruling sits at its own grid slot, after the 0.5fr spacer const rulingCenter = k => 5 + (nVersionSlots + 0.5 + k + 0.5) * stepUnit; // Find which compressed step contains the active version (for fill + active marker) const activeStepIdx = compressedSteps.findIndex(s => s.versionIds.includes(state.activeVersion) ); // Identify which ruling (if any) is active const activeRulingIdx = RULINGS.findIndex(r => r.id === state.activeStep); // Amber fill: from V1 to active step. If a ruling is active, fill all the way to the end of versions. const fillTo = activeRulingIdx >= 0 ? (nVersionSlots - 1) : activeStepIdx; if (fillTo >= 1) { const fill = document.createElement('div'); fill.className = 'cv-line-fill'; const startPct = stepCenter(1); const endPct = stepCenter(fillTo); fill.style.left = startPct + '%'; fill.style.width = (endPct - startPct) + '%'; track.appendChild(fill); } // Dashed segment from V0 (index 0) to V1 (index 1) const v0Idx = compressedSteps.findIndex(s => s.versionIds.includes('v0')); const v1Idx = compressedSteps.findIndex(s => s.versionIds.includes('v1')); if (v0Idx >= 0 && v1Idx >= 0) { const anchorSeg = document.createElement('div'); anchorSeg.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:14px;height:2px;background:repeating-linear-gradient(90deg,var(--navy) 0 4px,transparent 4px 8px);z-index:1;opacity:0.45'; anchorSeg.style.left = stepCenter(v0Idx) + '%'; anchorSeg.style.width = (stepCenter(v1Idx) - stepCenter(v0Idx)) + '%'; track.appendChild(anchorSeg); } // Time-gap label: dynamically compute the gap between last version date and first ruling date. // Sits in the 0.5fr spacer; only renders if there's at least one ruling. if (nRulings > 0) { const skipLine = document.createElement('div'); skipLine.className = 'cv-skip-line'; const skipStart = stepCenter(nVersionSlots - 1); const skipEnd = rulingCenter(0); skipLine.style.left = skipStart + '%'; skipLine.style.width = (skipEnd - skipStart) + '%'; track.appendChild(skipLine); // Compute year gap from last version date to first ruling date const lastVerDate = CLAIM_VERSIONS[CLAIM_VERSIONS.length - 1].date; const firstRulingDate = RULINGS[0].date; const yearGap = Math.round( (new Date(firstRulingDate) - new Date(lastVerDate)) / (1000 * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365.25) ); const skipLabel = document.createElement('div'); skipLabel.className = 'cv-skip-label'; skipLabel.style.left = ((skipStart + skipEnd) / 2) + '%'; skipLabel.textContent = `◄ ${yearGap} years ►`; track.appendChild(skipLabel); } // Render version steps (single or compressed) const dateMonths = ['','Jan','Feb','Mar','Apr','May','Jun','Jul','Aug','Sep','Oct','Nov','Dec']; compressedSteps.forEach((s, i) => { const step = document.createElement('div'); step.className = 'cv-step'; step.dataset.stepId = s.id; if (s.kind === 'single') { const v = s.version; step.dataset.versionId = v.id; if (v.isAnchor) step.classList.add('anchor'); if (i < activeStepIdx && !v.isAnchor) step.classList.add('done'); if (i === activeStepIdx && activeRulingIdx < 0) step.classList.add('active'); if (v.isIssued) step.classList.add('issued'); const [yy, mm] = v.date.split('-'); const dateShort = `${dateMonths[+mm]} ${yy}`; step.innerHTML = `

${v.id.toUpperCase()}

${v.stepLabel}

${v.isAnchor ? 'pre-prosecution' : dateShort}

`; step.addEventListener('click', () => { state.activeVersion = v.id; state.activeStep = v.id; state.activeCite = null; state.activeSpecAnchor = null; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); renderRightDefault(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); applyStepEventHighlight(); }); } else { // compressed step.classList.add('compressed'); step.dataset.versionId = s.versionIds[s.versionIds.length - 1]; step.dataset.count = '× ' + s.versionIds.length; if (i < activeStepIdx) step.classList.add('done'); if (i === activeStepIdx && activeRulingIdx < 0) step.classList.add('active'); const firstId = s.versionIds[0].toUpperCase(); const lastId = s.versionIds[s.versionIds.length - 1].toUpperCase(); const rangeLabel = `${firstId}–${lastId}`; const [syy, smm] = s.startDate.split('-'); const [eyy, emm] = s.endDate.split('-'); const dateRange = `${dateMonths[+smm]} ${syy} – ${dateMonths[+emm]} ${eyy}`; const eventCount = s.versionIds.reduce((acc, vid) => acc + (STEP_EVENTS[vid] || []).length, 0); step.innerHTML = `

${rangeLabel}

Argued · text unchanged

${dateRange}

${eventCount} events · ${s.versionIds.length} OAs

`; step.addEventListener('click', () => { // Active version = last in range (claim text matches end of compressed range) state.activeVersion = s.versionIds[s.versionIds.length - 1]; state.activeStep = s.id; state.activeCite = null; state.activeSpecAnchor = null; renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); renderRightDefault(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); applyStepEventHighlight(); }); } track.appendChild(step); }); // Empty 0.5fr spacer cell const spacer = document.createElement('div'); spacer.style.cssText = 'pointer-events:none'; track.appendChild(spacer); // RULING steps RULINGS.forEach(r => { const step = document.createElement('div'); step.className = 'cv-step ruling'; if (r.outcome === 'petitioner-favorable') step.classList.add('adverse'); if (state.activeStep === r.id) step.classList.add('active'); step.dataset.rulingId = r.id; const [yy, mm] = r.date.split('-'); const dateShort = `${dateMonths[+mm]} ${yy}`; const bindingPill = r.binding ? '

Binding now

' : ''; step.innerHTML = `

${r.id.toUpperCase()}

${r.label}

${dateShort}

${bindingPill} `; step.addEventListener('click', () => { const pos = POSITIONS.find(p => p.id === r.positionId); if (!pos) return; if (pos.limitationId !== state.activeLim) { setActiveLim(pos.limitationId); } if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { state.activeVersion = 'v5'; renderVersionChanges(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); } state.activeStep = r.id; renderVersionStepper(); showCitation(r.positionId); applyStepEventHighlight(); }); track.appendChild(step); }); } function renderVersionChanges(){ const wrap = document.getElementById('cv-changes'); // v6.4: if activeStep is a compressed step (id contains hyphen), render all // included versions' change bodies stacked. Otherwise render the single // active version body as before. const stepId = state.activeStep || state.activeVersion; const isCompressed = stepId && stepId.includes('-') && !STEP_EVENTS[stepId]; if (isCompressed) { const versionIds = stepId.split('-'); const versions = versionIds.map(id => CLAIM_VERSIONS.find(v => v.id === id)).filter(Boolean); const firstId = versionIds[0].toUpperCase(); const lastId = versionIds[versionIds.length - 1].toUpperCase(); wrap.className = 'cv-changes'; wrap.innerHTML = `

${versions[versions.length-1].changeIcon}

${versions.map(v => `

${v.id.toUpperCase()} · ${v.changeTitle} · ${fmtDate(v.date)}

${v.changeBody}

`).join('')}

`; return; } const v = CLAIM_VERSIONS.find(x => x.id === state.activeVersion); wrap.className = 'cv-changes' + (v.isIssued ? ' cv-issued' : ''); wrap.innerHTML = `

${v.changeIcon}

${v.changeTitle} · ${fmtDate(v.date)}

${v.changeBody}

`; } function updateActiveVersionLabel(){ const v = CLAIM_VERSIONS.find(x => x.id === state.activeVersion); const el = document.getElementById('cc-active-v'); el.innerHTML = `Viewing ${v.id.toUpperCase()} · ${v.label}`; } function renderLimList(){ const wrap = document.getElementById('lim-list'); wrap.innerHTML = ''; const activeV = CLAIM_VERSIONS.find(x => x.id === state.activeVersion); document.getElementById('claim-preamble').textContent = activeV.preamble; // v6.3: which elements did the current step actually affect? Used to mark // "AFFECTED / not affected" on each element strip. const stepId = state.activeStep || state.activeVersion; const affectedSet = getElementsAffectedByStep(stepId); LIMITATIONS.forEach(lim => { const div = document.createElement('div'); const isActive = lim.id === state.activeLim; const isAffected = affectedSet.has(lim.id); div.className = 'lim' + (isActive ? ' active' : ' compact'); div.dataset.lim = lim.id; const sigClass = lim.sigType === 'shaped' ? 's-shaped' : lim.sigType === 'stable' ? 's-stable' : 's-contested'; const sigLabel = lim.sigType === 'shaped' ? 'Prosecution-shaped' : lim.sigType === 'stable' ? 'Stable throughout' : 'Contested'; const positionCount = POSITIONS.filter(p => p.limitationId === lim.id).length; const limText = activeV.lims[lim.id] || lim.text; // Affects-pill: only show on non-active elements when meaningful. // For compressed step IDs, format as range (e.g., "V2–V4"). let affectsPill = ''; if (!isActive && stepId && stepId !== 'v0') { const parts = stepId.split('-'); const stepLabel = parts.length > 1 ? `${parts[0].toUpperCase()}–${parts[parts.length-1].toUpperCase()}` : stepId.toUpperCase(); affectsPill = isAffected ? `${stepLabel} changed this` : `unchanged`; } if (isActive) { div.innerHTML = `

${lim.id}

${limText}

${sigLabel} ${positionCount} positions

`; } else { // Compact strip: id + truncated text + meta on right div.innerHTML = `

${lim.id}

${limText}

${affectsPill} ${positionCount} pos

`; } div.addEventListener('click', () => setActiveLim(lim.id)); wrap.appendChild(div); }); } function setActiveLim(limId){ state.activeLim = limId; state.activeCite = null; state.activeSpecAnchor = null; renderLimList(); renderTrail(); renderRightDefault(); // Match counts on chip tooltips/jump-arrows depend on active limitation — refresh renderVenueChips(); renderDoctrineChips(); refreshPartyChipTooltips(); applyStepEventHighlight(); } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Position trail ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function getFilteredPositions(){ return POSITIONS .filter(p => p.limitationId === state.activeLim && state.filters.party.has(p.partyType) && state.filters.venue.has(p.venue) // Positions with no doctrine attachment (admin events like issuance) // always pass the doctrine filter — they're not doctrine-tagged. && (p.doctrine.length === 0 || p.doctrine.some(d => state.filters.doctrine.has(d)))) .sort((a,b) => a.date.localeCompare(b.date)); } function renderTrail(){ const trail = document.getElementById('trail'); const countEl = document.getElementById('trail-count'); const titleEl = document.getElementById('trail-title-h'); // V0 mode: show spec anchors instead of position cards (Layer 2 view) if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { const lim = LIMITATIONS.find(l => l.id === state.activeLim); const anchors = lim.specAnchors || []; titleEl.innerHTML = `Spec anchors — ${lim.label}`; countEl.innerHTML = `${anchors.length} anchor${anchors.length === 1 ? '' : 's'} · ${lim.id === 'a' ? 'Element (a)' : lim.id === 'b' ? 'Element (b)' : 'Element (c)'}`; trail.innerHTML = ''; const moatStrip = document.getElementById('moat-strip'); if (moatStrip) moatStrip.style.display = 'none'; const intro = document.createElement('div'); intro.style.cssText = 'background:linear-gradient(180deg,#F4F1E8,#FFFCF1);border:0.5px solid #D4CDB8;border-left:3px solid var(--navy);border-radius:6px;padding:10px 13px;margin-bottom:12px;font-size:11.5px;line-height:1.55;color:#3A2F1A;font-family:Fraunces,serif'; intro.innerHTML = `Layer 2 · Specification anchor. The plain meaning of element (${state.activeLim}) at filing — before any examiner rejection, applicant argument, or authority ruling. The spec passages below define the term, enumerate embodiments, and supply lexicographic support. This is the baseline that prosecution events will modify.`; trail.appendChild(intro); const list = document.createElement('div'); list.className = 'spec-anchor-list'; anchors.forEach(sa => list.appendChild(specAnchorCard(sa))); trail.appendChild(list); return; } // V1-V5 mode: render swimlane (Layer 4 — position record) // Moat strip stays hidden in V6 — moat dimensions move to inline glyphs in each card. const moatStrip = document.getElementById('moat-strip'); if (moatStrip) moatStrip.style.display = 'none'; titleEl.innerHTML = `Position record — ${LIMITATIONS.find(l => l.id === state.activeLim).displayLabel}`; const filtered = getFilteredPositions(); const all = POSITIONS.filter(p => p.limitationId === state.activeLim); const hidden = all.length - filtered.length; countEl.innerHTML = `${filtered.length} of ${all.length} positions${hidden > 0 ? ' · ' + hidden + ' filtered' : ''}`; trail.innerHTML = ''; // Swimlane column header const header = document.createElement('div'); header.className = 'swim-header'; header.innerHTML = `

Date

Patent owner

Challenger

`; trail.appendChild(header); // Encoding legend strip const legend = document.createElement('div'); legend.className = 'swim-legend'; legend.innerHTML = ` Patent owner argues — left lane Challenger argues — right lane Authority ruling on the spine — green = PO-favorable red = adverse `; trail.appendChild(legend); if (filtered.length === 0) { const empty = document.createElement('div'); empty.className = 'swim-empty'; empty.textContent = 'No positions match the current filters. Re-enable parties, venues, or doctrines to see more.'; trail.appendChild(empty); return; } // v6.3: if active version didn't change the active element, render a guidance // banner pointing at elements that did change. Doesn't replace the swimlane — // user still sees the matter history; this just sets context. const activeStepId = state.activeStep || state.activeVersion; const activeAffected = getElementsAffectedByStep(activeStepId); if (activeStepId && activeStepId !== 'v0' && !activeAffected.has(state.activeLim) && activeAffected.size > 0) { const parts = activeStepId.split('-'); const stepLabel = parts.length > 1 ? `${parts[0].toUpperCase()}–${parts[parts.length-1].toUpperCase()}` : activeStepId.toUpperCase(); const otherLims = LIMITATIONS.filter(l => activeAffected.has(l.id) && l.id !== state.activeLim); const suggestHTML = otherLims.map(l => ` → open element (${l.id}) — ${l.label} `).join(''); const note = document.createElement('div'); note.className = 'swim-empty unaffected'; note.innerHTML = `

${stepLabel} did not change element (${state.activeLim}). The matter history below is shown for context. ${stepLabel}'s changes were:

${suggestHTML}

`; note.querySelectorAll('[data-jump-lim]').forEach(a => { a.addEventListener('click', () => setActiveLim(a.dataset.jumpLim)); }); trail.appendChild(note); } // v6.4: temporal dimming removed — left timeline provides chronology context. // Group by venue (canonical order) — render as bands separated by year-gap dividers const order = VENUES.map(v => v.id); const grouped = {}; filtered.forEach(p => { if (!grouped[p.venue]) grouped[p.venue] = []; grouped[p.venue].push(p); }); const swim = document.createElement('div'); swim.className = 'swim'; trail.appendChild(swim); let lastBandLastDate = null; order.forEach(vid => { if (!state.filters.venue.has(vid)) return; const venue = VENUES.find(v => v.id === vid); const positions = grouped[vid]; if (!positions || positions.length === 0) return; // Time-gap divider between bands (skip before first band) if (lastBandLastDate) { const yrA = parseInt(lastBandLastDate.slice(0,4)); const yrB = parseInt(positions[0].date.slice(0,4)); const gapY = yrB - yrA; if (gapY >= 1) { const gap = document.createElement('div'); gap.className = 'swim-gap'; gap.innerHTML = `${gapY}-year gap · venue change`; swim.appendChild(gap); } } const band = document.createElement('div'); band.className = 'swim-band'; band.dataset.venue = vid; const startY = positions[0].date.slice(0,4); const endY = positions[positions.length-1].date.slice(0,4); const yearRange = startY === endY ? startY : `${startY}–${endY}`; const bandHead = document.createElement('div'); bandHead.className = 'swim-band-h'; bandHead.innerHTML = `

${venue.label}

${positions.length} position${positions.length === 1 ? '' : 's'} · ${yearRange} `; band.appendChild(bandHead); positions.forEach(p => { const row = positionCard(p); band.appendChild(row); }); swim.appendChild(band); lastBandLastDate = positions[positions.length-1].date; }); // ─── v6.2 BINDING CAPSTONE ─── // Find the most recent role=authority position and use its outcome to render // a colored "what binds claim meaning right now" footer. If the most recent // position is a pending challenge (no ruling event), render a pending capstone. const lastAuthority = filtered .filter(p => getRole(p) === 'authority') .sort((a,b) => b.date.localeCompare(a.date))[0]; const lastAny = filtered.slice().sort((a,b) => b.date.localeCompare(a.date))[0]; const pendingChallenge = lastAny && getRole(lastAny) === 'challenger' && lastAuthority && lastAny.date > lastAuthority.date; const capstone = document.createElement('div'); if (pendingChallenge) { capstone.className = 'swim-capstone pending'; capstone.innerHTML = ` Pending

Awaiting ruling — ${venueLabel(lastAny.venue)}

${lastAny.party.replace(/<[^>]+>/g,'').replace(/&/g,'&')} · filed ${fmtDate(lastAny.date)} · last binding ruling stands

`; trail.appendChild(capstone); } else if (lastAuthority) { const ev = EVENTS.find(e => e.positionId === lastAuthority.id); let outcomeFav = null; if (ev && ev.outcome) outcomeFav = ev.outcome === 'po-favorable'; else if ((lastAuthority.status||'').toLowerCase() === 'denied') outcomeFav = false; else if (/allow|granted|issued/i.test(lastAuthority.headline||'')) outcomeFav = true; else if (/reject|maintain|unpatentable|invalidat/i.test(lastAuthority.headline||'')) outcomeFav = false; const cls = outcomeFav === true ? 'po-favorable' : (outcomeFav === false ? 'adverse' : 'po-favorable'); const lblText = outcomeFav === false ? 'Binding · Adverse' : 'Binding'; const partyClean = lastAuthority.party.replace(/<[^>]+>/g,'').replace(/&/g,'&'); const headlinePlain = lastAuthority.headline.replace(/<[^>]+>/g,''); capstone.className = `swim-capstone ${cls}`; capstone.dataset.posId = lastAuthority.id; capstone.style.cursor = 'pointer'; capstone.innerHTML = ` ${lblText}

${headlinePlain}

${partyClean} · ${venueLabel(lastAuthority.venue)} · ${fmtDate(lastAuthority.date)}

`; capstone.addEventListener('click', () => showCitation(lastAuthority.id)); trail.appendChild(capstone); } } /* Render a single spec-anchor card (V0 mode) */ function specAnchorCard(sa){ const card = document.createElement('article'); card.className = 'spec-anchor' + (state.activeSpecAnchor === sa.id ? ' active' : ''); card.dataset.saId = sa.id; // Strip HTML from passage for preview const tmp = document.createElement('div'); tmp.innerHTML = sa.passage; const previewText = tmp.textContent.trim().slice(0, 180); const preview = previewText.length < tmp.textContent.length ? previewText + '…' : previewText; card.innerHTML = `

${sa.location} ${sa.type}

${sa.title}

${preview}

`; card.addEventListener('click', () => showSpecAnchor(sa.id)); return card; } function positionCard(p){ // V6: positionCard now returns a swimlane row (date | po-lane | spine | ch-lane). // The actual card sits in the lane matching partyType; the spine cell holds a // ruling diamond when partyType is authority. Function name preserved so // existing call sites in renderTrail keep working. const row = document.createElement('div'); row.className = 'swim-row'; row.dataset.posId = p.id; // v6.2: classify by ROLE (function), not by entity type (partyType). // An examiner rejection has partyType=authority but role=challenger — same person, // different hat. The same examiner's NOA has role=authority. Lane assignment uses // role exclusively from here on. const role = getRole(p); const isOwner = role === 'owner'; const isCH = role === 'challenger'; const isAU = role === 'authority'; // Determine if an authority ruling is adverse to the patent owner. // Priority: matched EVENT outcome → position status → headline heuristic. let outcomeFavorable = null; // null = neutral if (isAU) { const ev = EVENTS.find(e => e.positionId === p.id); if (ev && ev.outcome) { outcomeFavorable = ev.outcome === 'po-favorable'; } else if ((p.status || '').toLowerCase() === 'denied') { outcomeFavorable = false; } else if (/reject|maintain|unpatentable|invalidat/i.test(p.headline || '')) { outcomeFavorable = false; } else if (/allow|granted|issued/i.test(p.headline || '')) { outcomeFavorable = true; } } const adverse = outcomeFavorable === false; // Venue-specific role label for hover tooltip const venueRole = venueRoleLabel(role, p.venue); const statusLabel = ({proposed:'Proposed', rebuttal:'Rebuttal', accepted:'Ruled', denied:'Denied'})[p.status] || p.status; // Doctrine pills capped at 2 visible + "+N more" const docs = (p.doctrine || []).map(d => doctrineLabel(d)); let doctrineHTML = ''; if (docs.length > 0) { const visible = docs.slice(0, 2).map(d => `${d}`).join(''); const more = docs.length > 2 ? `+${docs.length - 2}` : ''; doctrineHTML = visible + more; } // v6.3: collapse 4 moat glyphs into a single ✓ verified pill with hover detail. // The 4-property invariant (every position carries authority, doctrine, graph, // citation) is the moat — but rendering 4 glyphs on every card is visual noise. // Single pill compresses to one signal; hover expands. const hasAuth = !!p.authW || isAU || p.partyType === 'authority'; const hasDoc = (p.doctrine || []).length > 0; const hasGraph = !!(p.related && ( (p.related.entities && p.related.entities.length) || (p.related.priorArt && p.related.priorArt.length) )); const hasCite = !!(p.cite && p.cite.doc); const score = (hasAuth ? 1 : 0) + (hasDoc ? 1 : 0) + (hasGraph ? 1 : 0) + (hasCite ? 1 : 0); const verifiedCls = score === 4 ? '' : 'partial'; const verifiedLabel = score === 4 ? 'verified' : `${score}/4`; const moatHTML = ` ${verifiedLabel}

Authority${hasAuth?'✓':'—'}

Doctrine${hasDoc?'✓':'—'}

Graph${hasGraph?'✓':'—'}

Citation${hasCite?'✓':'—'}

`; // v6.3: element coverage pills — show which claim elements this position // implicates (computed from sibling positions sharing date+venue+party). // Only render if coverage is partial; if all elements covered, suppress to reduce noise. const coveredElements = getCoveredElements(p); let elemPillsBlock = ''; if (coveredElements.size < LIMITATIONS.length) { const elemPillsHTML = LIMITATIONS.map(l => `${l.id}` ).join(''); elemPillsBlock = `${elemPillsHTML}`; } // Authority weight inline dots after party name let authwHTML = ''; if (p.authW) { const tierNames = ['','Examiner','PTAB','District','CAFC','SCOTUS']; let dots = ''; for (let i = 1; i <= 5; i++) dots += ``; authwHTML = `${dots}`; } const partyDisplay = p.partyHref ? `${p.party}` : p.party; const threadBadge = p.evidenceThread === 'iglarz' ? `★ Iglarz` : ''; const adverseClass = adverse ? ' adverse' : ''; const bindingClass = p.binding ? ' binding' : ''; const activeClass = state.activeCite === p.id ? ' active' : ''; const cardHTML = `

${partyDisplay}${authwHTML} ${statusLabel}

${p.headline}${threadBadge}

${p.detail}

${doctrineHTML}

${elemPillsBlock} ${moatHTML}

`; // ── Layout: place the card in the correct lane based on ROLE. let poLaneHTML = `

`; let chLaneHTML = `

`; let spineHTML = `

`; let auBarHTML = ''; if (isOwner) { poLaneHTML = `

${cardHTML}

`; } else if (isCH) { chLaneHTML = `

${cardHTML}

`; } else if (isAU) { // Authority: tag the row, render a strip element with diamond centered. row.classList.add('row-au'); if (adverse) row.classList.add('adverse'); const rulingCls = adverse ? 'adverse' : (outcomeFavorable === true ? '' : 'neutral'); const activeBarCls = state.activeCite === p.id ? ' active' : ''; const titleAttr = (p.headline || '').replace(/<[^>]+>/g,'').replace(/"/g,'"'); auBarHTML = `

${partyDisplay}${authwHTML} ${statusLabel}

${p.headline}${threadBadge}

${doctrineHTML}

${elemPillsBlock} ${moatHTML}

`; } row.innerHTML = `

${fmtDate(p.date)}

${poLaneHTML} ${spineHTML} ${chLaneHTML} ${auBarHTML} `; // Click handlers — card body, diamond, and authority strip all open citation const card = row.querySelector('.swim-card'); if (card) { card.addEventListener('click', (e) => { if (e.target.closest('a')) return; if (e.target.closest('.swim-moat')) return; showCitation(p.id); }); } const auBar = row.querySelector('.swim-au-bar'); if (auBar) { auBar.addEventListener('click', (e) => { if (e.target.closest('a')) return; if (e.target.closest('.swim-moat')) return; showCitation(p.id); }); } const dia = row.querySelector('.swim-ruling'); if (dia && !auBar) { // standalone diamond (shouldn't happen for AU rows now since dia is inside auBar, // but kept for safety in case future row types use a freestanding diamond) dia.addEventListener('click', () => showCitation(p.id)); } return row; } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ RENDER — Right column (default = synthesis; on-click = citation) ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function renderRightDefault(){ document.getElementById('right-default').style.display = 'block'; document.getElementById('right-cite').style.display = 'none'; const lim = LIMITATIONS.find(l => l.id === state.activeLim); // V0 mode: show "Plain Meaning at Filing" view if (state.activeVersion === 'v0') { document.getElementById('synth-card').innerHTML = `

Plain meaning at filing Layer 2

Element ${lim.id.toUpperCase()} — ${lim.label}

`; const anchors = lim.specAnchors || []; const intro = anchors.length === 0 ? '

No spec anchors recorded for this element.

' : `

The plain meaning of element (${lim.id}) at filing is grounded in ${anchors.length} specification passage${anchors.length === 1 ? '' : 's'} — definitions, embodiments, and enumerations that anchor what the term covers before any prosecution event modifies it.

`; const anchorList = anchors.map(sa => `

${sa.title}

${sa.location} · ${sa.type}

`).join(''); document.getElementById('synth-body').innerHTML = ` ${intro}

Anchored passages

${anchorList}

Why this matters

A patent claim does not arise out of nowhere. The applicant writes the words, but the meaning of those words comes from the specification. Layer 2 captures that baseline. Subsequent prosecution events (Layer 3) and adversarial rulings (Layer 4) modify it. To know what the claim means today, you need to see where the meaning started.

Next: Layer 3

Click V1 Filed on the lifecycle stepper to see how prosecution events modify this baseline.

`; document.querySelectorAll('.spec-anchor.active').forEach(el => el.classList.remove('active')); state.activeSpecAnchor = null; return; } // V1-V5 mode: synthesis view const s = SYNTHESIS[state.activeLim]; // Synthesis card (dark navy header) document.getElementById('synth-card').innerHTML = `

Current binding meaning Binding now

Element ${lim.id.toUpperCase()} — ${lim.label}

`; // Synthesis body document.getElementById('synth-body').innerHTML = `

${s.meaning}

Most authoritative ruling

${s.bindingAuthority}

${s.bindingMeta}

Binding constraints

' + c + '

Coverage

${s.coverage}

`; // Update active state on cards document.querySelectorAll('.pos.active, .swim-card.active, .swim-ruling.active, .swim-au-bar.active').forEach(el => el.classList.remove('active')); state.activeCite = null; } function showSpecAnchor(saId){ state.activeSpecAnchor = saId; document.querySelectorAll('.spec-anchor').forEach(el => { el.classList.toggle('active', el.dataset.saId === saId); }); const lim = LIMITATIONS.find(l => l.id === state.activeLim); const sa = (lim.specAnchors || []).find(x => x.id === saId); if (!sa) return; document.getElementById('right-default').style.display = 'none'; const right = document.getElementById('right-cite'); right.style.display = 'block'; // Build a "spec column" view — patent column rendering style // Highlight the cited phrase in the passage let passageHTML = sa.passage; if (sa.highlight && passageHTML.includes(sa.highlight)) { passageHTML = passageHTML.replace(sa.highlight, `${sa.highlight}`); } const typeLabels = { definition:'Lexicographic Definition', embodiment:'Embodiment', enumeration:'Enumeration', background:'Background' }; const typeLabel = typeLabels[sa.type] || sa.type; right.innerHTML = `

${typeLabel} · Spec anchor

${sa.title}

${sa.location}

View patent

US 8,268,847 B2 Therapeutic compositions comprising… ${sa.location.split('·')[0].trim()}

${passageHTML}

Why this anchor: ${sa.caption}

Linked element

Element (${lim.id}) — ${lim.label}

Layer 2

`; document.getElementById('spec-back').addEventListener('click', renderRightDefault); document.getElementById('right-scroll').scrollTop = 0; } function showCitation(posId){ state.activeCite = posId; document.querySelectorAll('.pos, .swim-card, .swim-au-bar').forEach(el => { el.classList.toggle('active', el.dataset.posId === posId); }); document.querySelectorAll('.swim-ruling').forEach(el => { el.classList.toggle('active', el.dataset.posId === posId); }); const p = POSITIONS.find(x => x.id === posId); if (!p) return; document.getElementById('right-default').style.display = 'none'; const right = document.getElementById('right-cite'); right.style.display = 'block'; // Render the citation source view const ex = p.excerpt; // Letterhead with seal + center text + page number block const lhText = ex.letterhead.map(l => `

${l}

`).join(''); // Extract page from cite (e.g., "pp. 5–8 · Rejection §III.A" → "Page 5") const pageMatch = (p.cite.page || '').match(/p+\.?\s*([\d–\-]+)/i); const pageDisp = pageMatch ? `Page ${pageMatch[1]}` : 'Excerpt'; const letterhead = `

U.S.
PATENT
OFFICE

${lhText}

${pageDisp}
of full document
▼ atomic block

`; // Build excerpt body: image-based (v4) vs simulated (v3 fallback for lim b, c) let excerptBody = ''; if (ex.imagePath !== undefined) { // v4 path: real PDF page image with optional overlay highlight + caption + alt thumbs if (ex.imagePath === null) { // Document not in upload set excerptBody = `

⌖

${ex.caption || 'Document content cross-referenced — PDF not in current upload set.'}

`; } else { const hl = ex.imageHighlight; const overlay = hl ? `

` : ''; const altThumbs = (ex.altImages || []).map(a => ` `).join(''); excerptBody = `

${overlay}

${ex.caption ? `

${ex.caption}

` : ''} ${altThumbs ? `

Same document, other relevant pages:

${altThumbs}

` : ''}

`; } } else { // v3 fallback path: simulated document with meta-grid + sections + signature const meta = (ex.meta || []).map(([k,v]) => `${k}${v}`).join(''); const sections = (ex.sections || []).map(s => `

${s.h}

${s.body}`).join(''); const sig = ex.signature ? `

${ex.signature}

` : ''; excerptBody = `

${meta}

${sections}${sig}`; } // Doc footer (form number, page count fake) const docFooter = ` `; // Linked entities const entitiesHTML = (p.related.entities || []).map(e => { const inner = `

${e.icon === 'ri-co' ? 'CO' : e.icon === 'ri-fi' ? 'FI' : e.icon === 'ri-at' ? 'AT' : e.icon === 'ri-ex' ? 'EX' : e.icon === 'ri-ju' ? 'JU' : 'PA'}

${e.name}

${e.meta}

`; return e.href ? `${inner}` : `

${inner}

`; }).join(''); // Prior art const priorArtHTML = (p.related.priorArt && p.related.priorArt.length) ? p.related.priorArt.map(a => `

${a.name}

${a.meta}

`).join('') : ''; // Doctrine pills const doctrineHTML = p.doctrine.map(d => `${doctrineLabel(d)}`).join(''); // Generic evidence-thread callout — only renders when a position is tagged with // an evidenceThread and there's at least one other position on the same thread. // Cross-venue evidence reuse (the Iglarz keystone in Opsumit; analogous threads // in other matters) earns a small amber callout with cross-references. let keystoneHTML = ''; if (p.evidenceThread) { const others = POSITIONS.filter(x => x.evidenceThread === p.evidenceThread && x.id !== p.id); if (others.length > 0) { const xrefList = others.map(o => `${o.cite.doc} (${fmtDateMD(o.date)}, ${o.party.replace(/&/g,'&')})`).join(' · '); keystoneHTML = `

Evidence thread · cross-venue reuse

This position cites a piece of evidence that also appears in: ${xrefList}.

`; } } right.innerHTML = `

${p.cite.docType}

${p.cite.doc}

${p.cite.date} ${p.cite.page} ${p.cite.app} ${p.cite.lexdanaId}

View full PDF

${doctrineHTML}

${keystoneHTML}

${letterhead}

${excerptBody} ${docFooter}

${entitiesHTML ? `

Linked entities

${entitiesHTML}

` : ''} ${priorArtHTML ? `

Cited prior art

${priorArtHTML}

` : ''}

`; document.getElementById('cite-back').addEventListener('click', renderRightDefault); document.getElementById('right-scroll').scrollTop = 0; } // v4: alt-image switching for citation panel (e.g., NOA p.6 / p.7 / p.8) function swapPdfPage(path, label){ const img = document.getElementById('pdf-page-img'); if (img) img.src = path; // Hide the existing highlight overlay since coords were tied to original page const stack = document.getElementById('pdf-page-stack'); if (stack){ const hl = stack.querySelector('.pdf-page-hl'); if (hl) hl.style.display = 'none'; } // Update caption to reflect the new page const cap = document.querySelector('.pdf-page-caption'); if (cap) cap.innerHTML = 'Showing: ' + label; } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ PROMPT INPUT ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ function wirePrompt(){ const input = document.getElementById('prompt-input'); const send = document.getElementById('prompt-send'); const flash = document.getElementById('prompt-flash'); // Auto-grow input.addEventListener('input', () => { input.style.height = 'auto'; input.style.height = Math.min(input.scrollHeight, 120) + 'px'; }); function fire(){ const q = input.value.trim(); if (!q) return; const lim = LIMITATIONS.find(l => l.id === state.activeLim); const ctx = state.activeCite ? `selected citation` : `Element (${state.activeLim}) ${lim.label}`; flash.textContent = `Would query: "${q}" with context: ${ctx}. (Demo — not connected to backend.)`; flash.classList.add('show'); input.value = ''; input.style.height = 'auto'; setTimeout(() => flash.classList.remove('show'), 4500); } send.addEventListener('click', fire); input.addEventListener('keydown', (e) => { if (e.key === 'Enter' && !e.shiftKey) { e.preventDefault(); fire(); } }); document.querySelectorAll('.prompt-sug').forEach(b => { b.addEventListener('click', () => { input.value = b.textContent; input.focus(); input.style.height = 'auto'; input.style.height = Math.min(input.scrollHeight, 120) + 'px'; }); }); } /* ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ INIT ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ */ document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', () => { renderHTimeline(); renderMiniTimeline(); renderVenueChips(); renderDoctrineChips(); wirePartyChips(); wireResetActions(); renderVersionStepper(); renderVersionChanges(); updateActiveVersionLabel(); renderLimList(); renderTrail(); renderRightDefault(); wirePrompt(); });

Position record — Element (a) — determining & storing minimum V