Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 177

RESPONSE/REPLY Microsoft Corporation's Responsive Claim Construction Brief and Exhibits by Microsoft Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit 802, # 3 Exhibit 906, # 4 Exhibit 907, # 5 Exhibit 908, # 6 Exhibit 909, # 7 Exhibit 910, # 8 Exhibit 1005, # 9 Exhibit 1006, # 10 Exhibit 1117, # 11 Exhibit 1118, # 12 Exhibit 1119, # 13 Exhibit 1120, # 14 Exhibit 1121, # 15 Exhibit 1122, # 16 Exhibit 1411)(Miner, Curtis)

Download PDF
Exhibit 906 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 10-24063-CIV-MORENO MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PLAINTIFF MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.’S UPDATED PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola Mobility”) submits the attached chart identifying its updated proposed constructions of the claim limitations of the patents-in-suit for which the parties seek construction by the Court. Motorola Mobility’s provides this submission without waiver of or prejudice to its right to amend or supplement as a result of further analysis, ongoing discovery, and in response to amendment or supplementation of constructions proposed by Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”). In particular, Motorola Mobility may amend its constructions to narrow the gap between its constructions and Microsoft’s to allow for resolution of as many claim construction disputes as possible prior to the submission of the parties’ claim construction briefs. Dated: June 3, 2011 By: /s/ Leslie M. Spencer_____ Jesse J. Jenner Steven Pepe Khue V. Hoang Leslie M. Spencer Ropes & Gray LLP 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Telephone: (212) 596-9000 Norman H. Beamer Mark D. Rowland Gabrielle E. Higgins Ropes & Gray LLP 1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor East Palo Alto, CA 94303 Telephone: (650) 617-4000 Kevin J. Post Megan F. Raymond Ropes & Gray LLP One Metro Center 700 12th Street NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 508-4600 Edward M. Mullins Hal M. Lucas Astigarraga Davis Mullins & Grossman, P.A. 701 Brickell Avenue 16th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 372-8282 Attorneys for Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June 3, 2011, copies of the foregoing Plaintiff Motorola Mobility, Inc.’s Updated Proposed Claim Constructions For The Patents-In-Suit were served by e-mail upon the counsel of record included in the attached Service List. /s/Leslie M. Spencer Leslie M. Spencer SERVICE LIST Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 1:10-cv-24063-MORENO Roberto Martinez, Esq. Curtis Miner, Esq. COLSON HICKS EIDSON 255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel: (305) 476-7400 Email: curt@colson.com bob@colson.com Attorneys for Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff MICROSOFT CORPORATION Of Counsel: David T. Pritikin Richard A. Cederoth Douglas I. Lewis John W. McBride SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP One South Dearborn Chicago, IL 60603 Tel: (312) 853-7000 Email: dpritikin@sidley.com rcederoth@sidley.com dilewis@sidley.com jmcbri01@sidley.com Brian R. Nester Kevin C. Wheeler SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 1501 K Street NW Washington, DC 20005 Tel: (202) 736-8000 Email: bnester@sidley.com kwheeler@sidley.com Motorola Patent No. 5,764,899 Claim Term/ Identified By Microsoft proposed term: Claims Motorola Proposed Construction 1 A system for communicating reply data with a communication unit comprising Microsoft proposed term: The preamble is not limiting and should be construed according to its plain and ordinary meaning. 1 a host server, in communication with the communication server Microsoft proposed term: A computer or a program that operates as an email post office, which can exchange data with the communication server 1, 15,18 This element requires no construction and should be accorded its plain and ordinary meaning. email; e-mail Microsoft proposed term: If this element is construed, it should be given the following meaning: "electronic mail" 1, 14, 16, 17 This element requires no construction and should be accorded its plain and ordinary meaning. "forwarding" / "forward" / "forwards" / "forwarded" Microsoft proposed term: a determination is made whether to forward the optimized reply or a replica reply 26875538_1 14 If this element is construed, it should be given the following meaning: "Forwarding from one computer or program to another" This element requires no construction and should be accorded its plain and ordinary meaning. If this element is construed, it should be given the following meaning: "the communication server decides whether to forward the optimized reply or the replica reply." 5

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?