link or associate structure to the claimed function. B. Braun Med., Inc., 124 F.3d at 1424. In addressing whether a disclosure of structure is sufficient under § 112, ¶ 6, the Federal Circuit has stated that a court should “ask[ ] first whether structure is described in the specification, and, if so, whether one skilled in the art would identify the structure from the description.” Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Devices, Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 1382 (Fed.Cir.1999). Thus, once some structure in the specification is identified, even if that structure is a black box, the proper inquiry then turns to whether the patent discloses sufficient structure with which one skilled in the art could use to perform the function. See S3, Inc. v. nVIDIA Corp., 259 F.3d 1364, 1370-71 (Fed.Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); Budde v. Harley-Davidson, Inc., 250 F.3d
holding that box labeled vacuum sensor and passage which notes that vacuum sensors were well known in the art at the time the patent issued sufficiently disclosed structure holding that black box labeled purchase orders was insufficient structure to perform the generate purchase orders function holding black box labeled sel was sufficient structure because it was a well known electronic structure and performs a common electronic function holding that a claim was not indefinite for using the term selector because it was a standard component and its structure was well known in the art holding that the corresponding structure is a controller