Adaptix Inc. v. AT&T Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC, LG Electronics Inc., LG Electronics USA Inc.
Published: Jun. 21, 2014 | Result Date: May 29, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 6:12-cv-00017-MHS-CMC Summary Judgment – Defense in part
Court
USDC Texas
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Thomas R. Fulford
(McCarter & English LLP)
Kevin Gannon
(Prince Lobel Tye LLP)
Defendant
Facts
Adaptix Inc. sued AT&T Mobility LLC, Pantech Inc., and Cello Partnership doing business as Verizon Wireless, alleging patent infringement.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Adaptix contended it held U.S. Patent No. 7,454,212 and 6,947,748, both entitled "OFDMA with Adaptive Subcarrier-Cluster Configuration and Selective Loading."
Adaptix claimed that defendants included devices in its products that infringed on plaintiff's patents.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied Adaptix's allegations, and argued that the two patents at issue were invalid for indefiniteness.
Defendants argued that Claim 11 of the '748 patent was indefinite because it recited a method of limitation in an apparatus claim. They further argued that Claims 9-10 of the '212 patent and Claims 8-9 of the '748 patent were indefinite because their stated limitations were not amenable to construction. Finally, they argued that Claims 2-4 of the '212 patent were indefinite because their limitation was insolubly ambiguous.
Result
Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted in part, and denied in part. Specifically, the court found that Claims 2-4 of the '212 patent were invalid for indefiniteness.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390