InterDigital Communications Inc. et al v. ZTE Corporation et al

Filing 271

MEMORANDUM ORDER regarding a dispute over the construction of several claim terms found in U.S. Patent No. 7,286,847 (see Memorandum Order for further details). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/29/2014. Associated Cases: 1:13-cv-00009-RGA, 1:13-cv-00010-RGA(nms)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

INTERDIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS,
INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs and
Counterclaim
Defendants;

Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00009-RGA

v.

ZTE CORP., et al.,
Defendants and
Counterclaim
Plaintiffs.

INTERDIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS,
INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs and
Counterclaim
Defendants;

Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00010-RGA

v.

NOKIA CORP., et al.
Defendants and
Counterclaim
Plaintiffs.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

1

Before the Court is a dispute regarding the construction of several claim terms found in
U.S. Patent No. 7,286,847. (1:13-cv-00009-RGA, D.I. 261; 1:13-cv-00010-RGA, D.I. 225). 1
The Court has considered the Parties' Amended Joint Claim Construction Brief. (D.I. 140).
This is a continuation of the Court's April 22, 2014 Markman Opinion. (D.I. 253). The parties
requested the construction of two terms, "circuit" and "[re-]synchroniz[ed/ing] to the/a pilot
signal" in their letter dated May 2, 2014. (DJ. 261). The Court will now construe the term
"circuit" and will reserve judgment on the term "[re-]synchroniz[ed/ing] to the/a pilot signal."

"circuit"

A.

1.

Plaintiffs' proposed construction: "electronic components that may include digital

circuitry, analog circuitry, software, firmware, or a combination of these elements"
2.

Defendants' proposed construction: "arrangement of electrical components

[further] configured, without the use of software, to"
3.

Court's Construction: "arrangement of electrical components"

The Plaintiffs argue that the "the term requires no special or judicial construction." (D.I.
140 at 39). The Plaintiffs cite as support for its claim construction the IEEE Standard
Dictionary of Electrical and Electronic Terms and the term's use in the '847 patent specification.
Id. at 39, 40. The Defendants also cite as evidence the IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical

and Electronic Terms and to figures present in the '010 patent specification. The Plaintiffs state
that the Defendants' construction is satisfactory, with the exception of the phrase "without the
use of software."

1

Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent citations to the Docket will be for case 1: 13-cv-00009-RGA.

2

i

1

l

I

The Court construes "circuit" to mean an "arrangement of electrical components." The
'847 patent specification does not define the term "circuit." Indeed, the term circuit is not used

in the '84 7 patent specification. Therefore, as the inventor did not provide a specific definition
for the term, the Court turns to the common meaning of the term within the field at the time of
the invention. Both parties agree that this can be derived from the IEEE Standard Dictionary of
Electrical and Electronic Terms. The Court also agrees. Finally, the Court finds that the
Defendants' proposal to include the construction "without the use of software" would add a
limitation to the term that is not found in the patent itself. In fact, to support the Defendants'
position, the Defendants cite another patent, the '010 patent, presumably because support for
their definition cannot be found within the '84 7 patent itself.

Entered this

'({~y of May, 2014.

3

I