Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Asus Computer International et al, No. 2:06-cv-00348 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 18, 2008)

Claims Construed
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:06-cv-00348, Dkt. No. 215
Decided
August 18, 2008
Judge
Charles Everingham IV, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION AND ORDER - the court has fully considered the dft's arguments and issues this order to resolve the parties claim construction disputes. The court adopts the above constructions for use in the trial of this case
Length
9 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

1. Introduction In the pre sent ca se, L aserDynamics, Inc. (“L aserDynamics”) acc uses the def endants of infringing claim 3 of U.S. Patent Number 5,587,981 (“the ‘981 patent”). The background of the technology and the invention is fully set forth in Judge Ward’s memorandum opinion and order on claim construction dated June 29, 2005, in Kamatani v. Benq Corp., Civil Action Number 2:03-CV- 437 (E.D. Tex.) (#105).