Out of Line: Chief Judge Moore Rebukes Counsel, Then Leans Toward Reversal in J&M v. Kinze

by Dennis Crouch

We didn't have any new precedential opinions yesterday and so instead I listened to several oral arguments. The most interesting for a court watcher was J&M Manufacturing Co. v. Kinze Manufacturing, Inc., No. 2025-1654 (Fed. Cir. argued Oct. 5, 2026). Chief Judge Moore opened Monday's argument by rebuking the patentee's lawyers for the way they litigated claim construction in the district court. As the Chief Judge described the Markman hearing, J&M's team introduced its advocate by reciting his mechanical engineering degree and 28 years of technical experience, and then told the district judge that two of its lawyers had clerked for Judge Prost, the author of O2 Micro. Her response from the bench: "Shame. Shame."

https://patentlyo.com/media/2026/10/jm-v-kinze-25-1654-moore-opening-rebuke.mp3

Still, the panel seems sympathetic to the appellant. Chief Judge C.J. Williams (N.D. Iowa) had granted summary judgment that the claim term "askewed angle" is indefinite. All three judges pressed Kinze on why the term is not simply broad. The full oral argument is on SCOTUSGate. The court heard oral arguments in Chicago at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, and Judge Stoll paused a couple of times to have counsel explain the doctrine "for the benefit of the students in the room."

---

To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. Already a member? Simply log in to access the full post.