In Comcast IP Holdings I LLC v. Sprint\u00a0Communications Company LP, [2015-1992] (March 7, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed a $7.5 million dollar award for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,170,008,
\n7,012,916, and 8,204,046 directed to the use of computer network
\ntechnology to facilitate a telephone call.<\/p>\n
Sprint complained about the construction of\u00a0\u201cswitched telecommunication system\u201d but the Federal Circuit failed to show how is construction would result in a different result. \u00a0Moreover, the Federal Circuit found\u00a0that the claim language and the specification did not support Sprint’s proposed construction.<\/p>\n
Sprint also complained that there was insufficient that its met the “call destination” and “identifier of a second party” limitations\u00a0of the claims, which were given their plain and ordinary meaning because neither party requested a claim construction. \u00a0The Federal Circuit found that\u00a0Sprint was essentially proffering a claim construction\u00a0argument in the guise of a challenge to the sufficiency of\u00a0the evidence of infringement.\u201d<\/p>\n
Finally, Sprint complained about the construction of “parsing,” arguing that the district court failed to apply disclaimers made by the patent owner during prosecution. But the Federal Circuit again found that Sprint failed to show how this affected the outcome. \u00a0However the Federal Circuit ultimately agreed with the district court’s construction.<\/p>\n
The Federal Circuit also affirmed the award of prejudgment interest from the date of the earliest patent, finding that\u00a0would be the date of negotiation of the undifferentiated reasonable royalty.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In Comcast IP Holdings I LLC v. Sprint\u00a0Communications Company LP, [2015-1992] (March 7, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed a $7.5 million dollar award for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,170,008, 7,012,916, and 8,204,046 directed to the use of computer network … Continue reading