United States Federal Circuit

In a patent case pertaining to alleged infringement by Microsoft and Dell of two patents owned by plaintiff-Lucent, summary judgment of non-infringement as to one patent is vacated and remanded where the district court's construction of the term "terminal device" was erroneous. Summary judgment of non-infringement as to another patent is affirmed as the district court's construction of the phrase "each successive iteration including the steps of" was proper.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/08/2008
• Published 05/08/2008

Judges

• Before LOURIE, LINN, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• John M. Desmarais, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiff/counterclaim defendant-appellant, Lucent Technologies, Inc.   With him on the brief were Robert A. Appleby and Jeanne M. Heffernan, of New York, NY, Ephraim D. Starr, of Los Angeles, CA., Joel M. Freed, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant/counterclaimant-appellee, Dell Inc.   With him on the brief were Natalia V. Blinkova, and Leonard D. Conapinski, of Chicago, IL.   Of counsel on the brief was Joseph A. Micallef, Arnold & Porter LLP, of Washington, DC.   Of counsel were Matthew N. Bathon and Ali R. Sharifahmadian, Arnold & Porter LLP, of Washington, DC., John W. Thornburgh, Fish & Richardson, P.C., of San Diego, CA, argued for defendant/counterclaimant-cross appellant, Microsoft Corporation.   With him on the brief were John E. Gartman, and John A. Dragseth, of Minneapolis, MN.   Of counsel was Juanita R. Brooks, of San Diego, CA.   Of counsel on the brief was Stephen P. McGrath, Microsoft Corporation, of Redmond, WA.