Search Team

Search by Last Name
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z

Articles

Temporary cache memory not the equivalent of permanent memory

July 1, 2014

Articles

Temporary cache memory not the equivalent of permanent memory

July 1, 2014

Back to News Listing

Fed. Cir. affirms claim construction and summary judgment of no doctrine of equivalents infringement.

Gemalto S.A. v. HTC Corp., et al. __F.3d__ (Fed. Cir. June 19, 2014) (Newman, Rader, DYK) (E.D. Tex., Davis) (3 of 5 stars)

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION:  The district court properly used the terms “memory” and “programmable device” to limit the claims to devices that stored “all program memory” for running Java programs on the relevant chip, and not on some other device.   The court was fairly vague with respect to what language in the claim was the hook for limiting the claims, and it relied on a seemingly pervasive distinction that the applicants made in the specification and throughout prosecution (including in related cases) between prior devices that could not fit all the program on the chip, and the invention, which overcame that problem.  For the “programmable device” limitation, the prior art also disclosed computers that ran Java applications and thus Appellant’s proposed construction could not be correct because it would “encompass [] any device capable of executing program instructions,” even those disclosed in the prior art.  Id. at 16.

Read more on Fish’s Litigation Blog

Stay current with Fish Sign up for our Newsletter