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

E.D. Tex.

Video Solutions Pte. Ltd. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2:23-cv-00222 (E.D. Tex. May 14, 2025)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:23-cv-00222, Dkt. No. 276
Decided
May 14, 2025
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION (Motion(s)270 terminated)
Length
7 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 is Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.’s (“Cisco”) Motion for Further Claim Construction of “Endpoint” (the “Motion”). (Dkt. No. 270.) In the Motion, Cisco requests that the Court amend and add language to the Court’s prior construction to clarify that the “ endpoints” in claim 1 of the ’452 Patent are “a device of collection of devices, where videoconference data flow starts or ends, that are configured to capture videoconference data and that connect to and exchange information over a computer network.” ( Id.