United States: Inventive Features Repeatedly Emphasized In A Patent Cannot Be Overlooked In Claim Construction

In Parallel Networks, LLC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., No. 12-1227 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 16, 2013), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's claim constructions and SJ of noninfringement, and also affirmed the district court's denial of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion seeking leave to amend infringement contentions.

Parallel Networks, LLC ("Parallel") owns U.S. Patent No. 6,446,111 ("the '111 patent"), which is directed to the use of individualized applets in handheld devices to speed up data transfer. Parallel filed suit against numerous defendants, alleging that the defendants' websites provided applets in response to user requests in a manner that infringed the '111 patent.The district court construed certain claim terms that the defendants contended were case dispositive, including the terms "executable applet" and "dynamically generated by the server in response to the request."Regarding the "dynamically generated" term, the district court adopted the defendants' construction that an applet that is "dynamically generated by the server in response to the request" is an applet constructed at the server by combining the requisite functional code with the necessary data at the time of and in response to the client request. In each of the accused instrumentalities, at least one of the functional code or necessary data was required for accessing a link, which necessitated a subsequent transmission between the client and the server to combine the data and functionality required for the applet to operate.

Based on this finding and in view of the adopted constructions, the district court granted SJ of noninfringement for various defendants and later severed them from the case.Parallel also filed a Rule 59(e) motion seeking leave to amend its infringement contentions in order to allege infringement against certain defendants based on the district court's claim construction, which Parallel argued was an unexpected and intervening change in the law.The district court denied the motion. Parallel appealed the district court's claim constructions, noninfringement rulings, and denial of the Rule 59(e) motion to the Federal Circuit with respect to the severed defendants.

On appeal, the Federal Circuit first addressed the district court's claim constructions. Agreeing with the district court that the data manipulation service (or functionality) and the particularized data are both necessary components of the applet as it is initially generated and before it is transferred to the client, the Court noted that asserted claim 1 teaches that the applet is "generated" in response to a user request, is "executable" and "operable," is "associated with" the two "constituent" systems of particularized data and functionality, and is thereafter "to be transferred."The Court found that, taken together, these terms described a natural progression in the asserted claims: upon receipt of a user request, the server generated an applet with two constituent parts (the functionality and the particularized data).Furthermore, that applet is executable (i.e., capable of being executed and carried out fully and completely) and is then transferred to the client device for execution.

"What purportedly made the [asserted] patent unique and inventive was combining and transmitting the particularized data and functionality 'as a group' in order to transfer an 'executable applet' and reduce the number of transmissions over the communications link.[The plaintiff] cannot now claim that a limitation that featured so critically in the patent was not, in fact, a part of the invention."Slip op. at 23.

The Court found that Figure 3 of the '111 patent depicts this chronology and that the specification substantiates this construction. In particular, the specification noted that "combining the data and functionality at the outset and transmitting them 'as a group' facilitates the invention's key goal of 'greatly reduc[ing]' the number of communications over low-speed networks."Slip op. at 17-18 (alteration in original) (citation omitted).Based on this construction, the Court held that a finding of noninfringement directly followed since each of the accused instrumentalities was missing at least one portion of the functional code or data when the applet, which included only a link for the missing portion, was transferred to the client.

Next, the Court addressed Parallel's challenge to the district court's construction of the "dynamically generated" term. Parallel contended that the district court erred in construing "generated by the server" to mean "constructed at the server, by combining," because "generate" is broader than "combine," and that the asserted claims require only that the data and the functionality be "associated with" the applet, not combined into a single file with the applet.Id. at 18-19.Rejecting Parallel's position, the Court explained that the meaning that Parallel urged for the term "associated with" was overly expansive and would effectively rewrite the '111 patent, as the '111 patent clearly teaches an applet containing both the data and the functionality when the applet is generated.

The Court then addressed Parallel's remaining arguments concerning the district court's constructions. Parallel argued that the term "generated by the server" was incorrectly construed as "generated at the server."Id. at 20.Recognizing that "by" does not necessarily mean "at," the Court nonetheless found that Parallel provided no indication as to why the difference between "by" and "at" mattered in this context, as the critical point for the case was that the applet cannot be finalized at the client. The Court also rejected Parallel's arguments regarding the district court's construction of "dynamically . . . in response to the request" to mean "at the time of and in response to the request."Id. at 21.The Court reasoned that although an applet could be generated "in response to" a request even if it were generated at some later point rather than at the exact time of the request, that did not affect the critical requirement that the applet be generated and executable before it is transferred to the client.

The Court also rejected Parallel's argument against the district court's construction of "dynamically generated" to require that the data and functionality be transferred to the client in a single transmission. In support of these arguments, Parallel cited to numerous examples in the specification that describe more than one transmission over a communications link. In rejecting these arguments, the Court noted that Parallel conflated two different concepts:(1) the generation of the applet at the server and its transmission to the client; and (2) the operation of the applet after it has been fully transferred to the client. While the '111 patent claims deal with the former concept, the portions of the specification that Parallel cited to deal only with the latter concept, and the Court therefore found these arguments unpersuasive.

Based on its critique of the district court's claim construction, Parallel argued that the district court's infringement analysis was necessarily erroneous. Parallel argued that it does not matter whether the client device needs to make a separate request to receive the associated data or functionality because, in both instances, the constituent system is sufficiently "associated with" the applet. Rejecting Parallel's position, the Court noted that Parallel admitted that the executable applet must consist of both data and functionality, and that the '111 patent repeatedly emphasizes that feature. The Court further stated that "[w]hat purportedly made the '111 patent unique and inventive was combining and transmitting the particularized data and functionality 'as a group,'" and "Parallel cannot now claim that a limitation that featured so critically in the patent was not, in fact, a part of the invention."Id. at 23.

Finally, the Court addressed Parallel's challenge to the district court's denial of the Rule 59(e) motion. Parallel contended that the district court did not address one of three factors that the Fifth Circuit considers under Rule 59(e)—the need to prevent a "manifest injustice"—and failed to consider four "good cause" factors for allowing amendments to infringement contentions under Local Patent Rule 3-6(b) for the district court. In rejecting Parallel's arguments, the Court agreed with the district court that Parallel was seeking to amend its infringement contentions to make arguments that could have been made before the entry of SJ, and that the district court's claim construction was not an intervening change in the law. The Court noted that Parallel chose to pursue a theory that allowed it to accuse a larger number of defendants, and, having lost, "may not now initiate what would amount to a completely new infringement proceeding."Id. at 24.The Court also found that the need to prevent a "manifest injustice" is a catch-all factor that was already implicit in the district court's consideration and rejection of Parallel's motion as a whole. Furthermore, the Court agreed with the district court that Local Patent Rule 3-6(b) was inapplicable, because the adopted claim construction could have been anticipated, and because Parallel had provided no good explanation for its failure to bring its new infringement contentions earlier and thus brought any perceived prejudice on itself.

Accordingly, the Court affirmed the district court's claim constructions, SJ of noninfringement, and denial of Parallel's Rule 59(e) motion.

Judges:Prost, Bryson (author), Wallach

[Appealed from E.D. Tex., Chief Judge Davis]

This article previously appeared in Last Month at the Federal Circuit, February 2013

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
14 Nov 2018, Conference, Washington, DC, United States

Finnegan is a Silver sponsor of the sixth annual World Intellectual Property Forum, hosted by Intellectual Professionals LLP. Finnegan partner Clare Cornell will present “Trademarks v. Company Names” and partner Patrick Coyne will present “Current Issues in U.S. Patent Law and Reform: The Next Wave”

16 Nov 2018, Seminar, Copenhagen, Denmark

Innovative companies, large and small, use patents to protect their key inventions. Obtaining valuable patents, however, requires skilled patent counsel and an in-depth knowledge of the legal requirements for securing claims that are strategically useful to your company.

17 Nov 2018, Conference, Washington, DC, United States

Finnegan partner Clare Cornell will present “Covert Trademark Use in the Internet: Licit or Illicit” at the Asian Patent Attorneys Association Conference.

 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions