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

E.D. Tex.

Iovate Health Sciences Inc et al v. Bio-Engineered Supplements & Nutrition Inc, No. 9:07-cv-00046 (E.D. Tex. June 5, 2008)

Claims Construed
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division
Case No.
No. 9:07-cv-00046, Dkt. No. 161
Decided
June 5, 2008
Judge
Ron Clark, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and Order Construing Claim Terms of U S Patent Nos. 5,973,199 and 6,100,287 (PART II). The jury shall be instructed in accordance with the court's interpretation of the disputed claim terms in the '287 patent
Length
13 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.

CONSTRUING CLAIM TERMS OF UNITED STATES PATENT NOS. 5,973,199 and 6,100,287 (PART II) Plaintiffs Iovate Health Sciences, Inc. and University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc.1 filed suit against Defendants Bio-Engineered Supplements & Nutrition, Inc., d/b/a BSN Inc., and Medical Resear ch Institute, cla iming infring ement of U .S. Patent Nos. 5,973,199 (“the ´ 199 patent”) and 6,100,287 (“the ´287 patent”). In its Memorandum Opinion and Order of March 28, 2008, the cour t previously construed the disputed terms in the ‘199 pate nt. See Doc. # 137.