Adasa Inc. v. SML Group Limited et al, No. 4:24-cv-00370 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 13, 2025)

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.

The Court must determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms in U.S. Patent No. 9,798,967 (the “ ʼ967 Patent ”). Having considered the parties’ filings, (Dkt. #55, #58, #60), their arguments at the claim construction hearing , the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, and the relevant law , the Court issues this Claim Construction Order. See Teva Pharm s. USA v. Sandoz, Inc. , 574 U.S. 318, 331– 32, 135 S.Ct. 831, 190 L.Ed.2d 719 (2015); Phillips v. AWH Corp. , 415 F.3d 1303, 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). I.