Patent Case Watch

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

E.D. Tex.

ReedHycalog UK, Ltd. et al v. Diamond Innovations Inc, No. 6:08-cv-00325 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 30, 2009)

Claims Construed
Claim Construction Indefiniteness
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:08-cv-00325, Dkt. No. 82
Decided
November 30, 2009
Judge
Leonard Davis, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 69 Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness of US Patent No. 6,592,985; denying 71 Motion for Summary Judgment for Indefiniteness of the Thermal Characteristic Patents. The Court interprets the clai…
Length
21 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.

This Memorandum Opinion construes the terms in the Patents-in-Suit: U.S. Pat. No. 6,585,064 (the “’064 Patent); U.S. Pat. No. 6,592,985 (the “’985 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,749,033 (the “’033 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,589,640 (the “’640 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,739,214 (the “’214 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,544,308 (the “’308 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,797,326 (the “’326 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,562,462 (the “’462 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,878,447 (the “’447 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,861,098 (the “’098 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No.

Download Opinion (PDF)

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 23, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case