In Kyocera Wireless Co. v. President Elec., LTD, Plaintiff appealed a lower court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of a design patent for a "portable cellular handset telephone." Plaintiff argued that summary judgment was improper without expert testimony; however, the Federal Circuit disagreed, stating:

The record does not reflect that any of the parties sought to introduce expert evidence, and expert evidence is not always necessary to resolve questions of patent infringement. See, e.g., Union Carbide Corp. v. Am. Can Co., 724 F.2d 1567, 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1984). While expert evidence may be necessary in cases involving complex technology, see Centricut, LLC v. Esab Group, Inc., 390 F.3d 1361, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2004), this is not such a case, and [Defendant] does not explain how expert evidence would have been helpful. Because we find no error in the district court’s disposition of this case, we affirm the judgment below.

Kyocera Wireless Co. v. President Elec., LTD, No. 06-1131 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2006) (unpublished opinion).