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

E.D. Tex.

SynQor Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2:14-cv-00286 (E.D. Tex. July 11, 2014)

Claims Construed
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:14-cv-00286, Dkt. No. 111
Decided
July 11, 2014
Judge
Caroline Craven, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ORDER re Construction Briefs
Length
10 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.

Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Supplemental Claim Constr uction Brief (D ocket Entry # 72), Defendants’ Response (Docket Entry #79), Plaintiff’s Reply (Docket Entry #81), and Defendants’ Surreply (Docket Entry #82). I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed suit on January 28, 2011, alleging infringement of six patents-in-suit: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,072,190 ( “‘190 Patent”), 7,269,034 (“‘034 Patent”), 7,272,021 (“‘021 Patent”), 7,558,083 (“‘083 Patent”), 7,564,702 (“‘702 Patent”) and 8,023,290 (“‘290 Patent”).