GeoDynamics, Incorporated v. DynaEnergetics US, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-01546 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 25, 2016)

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.

On August 2, 2016, the Court held a hearing to determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms in United Stat es Patent Nos. 9,080,431 (“the ’431 Patent”) . The Court has considered the arguments made by the parties at the hearing and in their claim construction briefs. (Dkt. Nos. 62, 66, & 68 ). The Court has also considered the intrinsic evidence and made subsidiary factual findings about the extrinsic eviden ce. See Phillips v. AWH Corp. , 415 F.3d 1303, 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. , 135 S. Ct.