Bytemark, Inc. v. Masabi Ltd., No. 2:16-cv-00543 (E.D. Tex. June 20, 2017)

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 May 31, 2017, the Court held an oral hearing to determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms in U.S. Patent No s. 8,494,967 (the “’967 Patent”) and 9,239,993 (the “’993 Patent). The Court has considered the parties’ claim construction briefing (Dkt. Nos. 54, 59, and 60) and arguments. Based on the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, the Court construes the disputed terms in this Memorandum Opinion and Order. See Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831 (2015).