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

E.D. Tex.

Cardsoft, Inc. et al v. Verifone Holdings, Inc. et al, No. 2:08-cv-00098 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 23, 2011)

Claims Construed
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:08-cv-00098, Dkt. No. 251
Decided
September 23, 2011
Judge
Charles Everingham IV, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re Claim Construction
Length
26 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.

I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs CardSoft (Assignment for the Bene fit of Creditors) LLC and CardSoft, Inc. (collectively “CardSoft” or “Plaintiffs”) brought this action against Verifone Holdings, Inc., Verifone Inc., Hypercom Corpor ation, Ingenico S.A., Ingenico Corp., Ingenico Inc., Way Systems, Inc., Shera International Ltd. and Blue Bamboo (USA), Inc. 1 (collectively “Defendants”), alleging infringement of Ca rdSoft’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,934,945 (“the ’945 Patent”) and 7,302,683 (“the ’683 Patent”). 2 The court held a Markman hearing on July 29, 2011.