Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al
Proposed Jury Instructions by Eolas Technologies Incorporated, The Regents of the University of California. (McKool, Mike)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
THE REGENTS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
ADOBE SYSTEMS INC., AMAZON.COM
INC., CDW CORPORATION, CITIGROUP
INC., THE GO DADDY GROUP, INC.,
GOOGLE INC., J.C. PENNEY
CORPORATION, INC., STAPLES, INC.,
YAHOO! INC., and YOUTUBE, LLC.,
CASE NO. 6:09-CV-00446-LED
PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDMENTS TO THEIR PROPOSED FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
IN SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF DOCKET NUMBER NO. 1316-21
Plaintiffs Eolas Technologies Inc. and the Regents of the University of California submit the
following amendments to their proposed final jury instructions in Sections 4 and 5 of the parties’
Joint Proposed Final Jury Instructions for Invalidity Trial, Docket Number 1316-2.
amendments appear in pink highlighted, underlined italics.
Plaintiffs reserve the right to modify or amend these proposed instructions prior to the Court’s
charge conference if so warranted.
MEANING OF THE CLAIM TERMS2
At the beginning of the trial, I gave you some general information about patents and the
patent system and a brief overview of the patent laws relevant to this case.
I will now give you more detailed instructions about the patent laws that
Adapted from the Court’s Final Jury Instructions in Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.,
No. 6:09-CV-422 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 2011) (Dkt. No. 482); Cheetah Omni LLC v. Verizon Services
Corp., No. 6:09-CV-260 (E.D. Tex. March 2011); Bedrock Computer Technologies LLC v. Google,
Inc., Civil Action No. 6:09-CV-269 LED (E.D. Tex. April 15, 2011); Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple,
Inc., Civil Action No. 6:08-CV-88 LED (E.D. Tex. Oct. 1, 2010).
specifically relate to this case. If you would like to review my instructions at any time during your
deliberations, they will be available to you in the jury room.
As I told you at the beginning of trial, the claims of a patent are the numbered sentences at
the end of the patent. The claims describe the invention made by the inventor and describe what the
patent owner owns and what the patent owner may prevent others from doing. Claims may describe
products or systems, or methods for using a product or system.
Claims are usually divided into parts or steps, called “limitations” or “elements” or
“requirements.” For example, a claim that covers the invention of a table may recite the tabletop,
four legs, and the glue that secures the legs to the tabletop. The tabletop, legs, and glue are each a
separate limitation or requirement of the claim.
Even though the PTO examiner has allowed the
claims of a patent, you have the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether the claims of the patent
are valid. In this case, Defendants contend that the asserted claims of the ’906 and ’985 patents are
invalid as anticipated or obvious, and not supported by the written description in the patent.
DATED: February 7, 2012.
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
/s/ Mike McKool
Texas State Bar No. 13732100
Texas State Bar No. 04035500
Rosemary T. Snider
Texas State Bar No. 18796500
Texas State Bar No. 24040865
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Kevin L. Burgess
Texas State Bar No. 24006927
Josh W. Budwin
Texas State Bar No. 24050347
Gretchen K. Curran
Texas State Bar No. 2405-5979
Matthew B. Rappaport
Texas State Bar No. 24070472
Texas State Bar No. 24070000
MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
300 West Sixth Street, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78701
Robert M. Parker
Texas State Bar No. 15498000
Robert Christopher Bunt
Texas Bar No. 00787165
Andrew T. Gorham
Texas State Bar No. 24012715
PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C.
100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114
Tyler, Texas 75702
(903) 533-9687 FAX
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INC.
AND THE REGENTS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance
with Local Rule CV-5(a). This document was served on all counsel by email on February 7, 2012.
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?