Apple has won Samsung in California claim construction battle on all patents except one SEP. A claim construction is a huge component of the lawsuit for any patent as it sets the definition of the the words in the claim. As infringement requires all elements in the claim to be violated, setting the definition of such elements in Apple's favor would give a huge advantage to Apple in its case for the patent lawsuit. Apart from proving infringement, winning a claim construction battle also reduces the chances of having the patent invalidated. As mentioned last week with the case of the slide-to-unlock in Germany, one alternative of fighting back against a lawsuit for patent infringement is to try invalidate the patent. Laying out the 'rules' of the patent well would then aid against having any patent invalidated.
It is also interesting to note that companies sometimes do contradicting actions in hopes to win against patent infringement. As in the case of Samsung and Apple, Samsung had consistently tried to narrow the scope of the claims in order to have a better basis for disputing infringement. However, sometimes, defendants will broaden them instead, so that they can argue that it is too broad and request for invalidation. Samsung's efforts were, however, rejected by the court, and it seems like it will get much harder when going for the trial next year to dispute infringement, because of the claim construction.
It is so crazy how a word or two can make someones patent useless. Besides going to a lawyer, I wonder what type of precautions one can take when filing the patent or the claim.
ReplyDelete