Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC

• Decision Date: 16 June 2015
• Docket Number: No. 2013–1130.,2013–1130.
• Citation: 792 F.3d 1339,115 U.S.P.Q.2d 1105
• Parties: Richard A. WILLIAMSON, Trustee for at Home Bondholders Liquidating Trust, Plaintiff–Appellant v. CITRIX ONLINE, LLC, Citrix Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Adobe Systems, Inc., Defendants–Appellees Webex Communications, Inc., Cisco Webex, LLC, Cisco Systems, Inc., Defendants–Appellees International Business Machines Corporation, Defendant–Appellee.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit

792 F.3d 1339

115 U.S.P.Q.2d 1105

Richard A. WILLIAMSON, Trustee for at Home Bondholders Liquidating Trust, Plaintiff–Appellant

v. CITRIX ONLINE, LLC, Citrix Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Adobe Systems, Inc., Defendants–AppelleesWebex Communications, Inc., Cisco Webex, LLC, Cisco Systems, Inc., Defendants–AppelleesInternational Business Machines Corporation, Defendant–Appellee.

No. 2013–1130.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 16, 2015.

Brett Johnston Williamson, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Newport Beach, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Tim D. Byron; William C. Norvell, Jr., Scott Dion Marrs, Brian T. Bagley, Beirne Maynard & Parsons, LLP, Houston, TX.

Kurt Louis Glitzenstein, Fish & Richardson P.C., Boston, MA, argued for all defendants-appellees. Citrix Online, LLC, Citrix Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Adobe Systems, Inc., also represented by Frank Scherkenbach; Indranil Mukerji, Washington, DC; Jonathan J. Lamberson, Redwood City, CA. Defendant-appellee Microsoft Corporation also represented by Isabella Fu, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA.

Douglas M. Kubehl, Baker Botts LLP, Dallas, TX, for defendants-appellees Webex Communications, Inc., Cisco Webex, LLC, Cisco Systems, Inc. Also represented by Samara Kline, Brian Douglas Johnston.

Mark J. Abate, Goodwin Procter LLP, New York, N.Y., for defendant-appellee International Business Machines Corporation. Also represented by Calvin E. Wingfield, Jr. ; William F. Sheehan, Washington, DC.

Before MOORE, LINN, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.¹

Opinion

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge LINN.

Opinion concurring in part, dissenting in part, and with additional views filed by Circuit Judge REYNA.

PROST, Chief Judge, LOURIE, LINN, DYK, MOORE, O'MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, TARANTO, CHEN, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges, have joined Part II.C.1. of this opinion.

Opinion dissenting from Part II.C.1. filed by Circuit Judge NEWMAN.

LINN, Circuit Judge.

Richard A. Williamson (“Williamson”), as trustee for the At Home Corporation Bondholders' Liquidating Trust, owns U.S. Patent No. 6,155,840 (the “'840 patent”) and appeals from the stipulated final judgment in favor of defendants Citrix Online, LLC; Citrix Systems, Inc.; Microsoft Corporation; Adobe Systems, Inc.; Webex Communications, Inc.; Cisco Webex, LLC; Cisco Systems, Inc.; and International Business Machines Corporation (collectively, “Appellees”). Because the district court erroneously construed the limitations “graphical display representative of a classroom” and “first graphical display comprising ... a classroom region,” we vacate the judgment of non-infringement of claims 1–7 and 17–24 of the '840 patent. Because the district court correctly construed the limitation “distributed learning control module,” we affirm the judgment of invalidity of claims 8–12 of the '840 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 112² , para. 2. Accordingly, we remand.

I. Background

A. The '840 Patent

The '840 patent describes methods and systems for “distributed learning” that utilize industry standard computer hardware and software linked by a network to provide a classroom or auditorium-like metaphor—i.e., a “virtual classroom” environment. The objective is to connect one or more presenters with geographically remote audience members. '840 patent col.2 ll.10–14. The disclosed inventions purport to provide “the benefits of classroom interaction without the detrimental effects of complicated hardware or software, or the costs and inconvenience of convening in a separate place.” Id. at col.2 ll.4–7.

There are three main components of the “distributed learning” system set forth in the '840 patent : (1) a presenter computer, (2) audience member computers, and (3) a distributed learning server. The distributed learning server implements a “virtual classroom” over a computer network, such as the Internet, to facilitate communication and interaction among the presenter and audience members. The presenter computer is used by the presenter to communicate with the audience members and control information that appears on the audience member's computer screen. Id. at col.4 l.66–col.5 l.2. An audience member's computer is used to display the presentation and can be used to communicate with the presenter and other audience members. Id. at col.5 ll.11–14.

The '840 patent includes the following three independent claims, with disputed terms highlighted:

1. A method of conducting distributed learning among a plurality of computer systems coupled to a network, the method comprising the steps of:

providing instructions to a first computer system coupled to the network for:

creating a graphical display representative of a classroom;

creating a graphical display illustrating controls for selecting first and second data streams;

creating a first window for displaying the first selected data stream; and

creating a second window for displaying the second selected data stream, wherein

the first and second windows are displayed simultaneously; and

providing instructions to a second computer system coupled to the network for:

creating a graphical display representative of the classroom;

creating a third window for displaying the first selected data stream; and

creating a fourth window for displaying the second selected data stream, wherein

the third and fourth windows are displayed simultaneously.

8. A system for conducting distributed learning among a plurality of computer systems coupled to a network, the system comprising:

a presenter computer system of the plurality of computer systems coupled to the network and comprising:

a content selection control for defining at least one remote streaming data source and for selecting one of the remote streaming data sources for viewing; and

a presenter streaming data viewer for displaying data produced by the selected remote streaming data source;

an audience member computer system of the plurality of computer systems and coupled to the presenter computer system via the network, the audience member computer system comprising:

an audience member streaming data viewer for displaying the data produced by the selected remote streaming data source; and

a distributed learning server remote from the presenter and audience member computer systems of the plurality of computer systems and coupled to the presenter computer system and the audience member computer system via the network and comprising:

a streaming data module for providing the streaming data from the remote streaming data source selected with the content selection control to the presenter and audience member computer systems; and

a distributed learning control module for receiving communications a distributed learning control module for receiving communications transmitted between the presenter and the audience member computer systems and for relaying the communications to an intended receiving computer system and for coordinating the operation of the streaming data module.

17. A distributed learning server for controlling a presenter computer system and an audience member computer system coupled to the distributed learning server via a network, the distributed learning server comprising:

a module for providing a first graphical display on the presenter computer system, the first graphical display comprising:

a first presenter content selection control for selecting a first source of streaming content representative of graphical information;

a first presenter content display region for displaying the graphical information represented by the streaming content from the first selected source;

a second presenter content selection control for selecting a second source of streaming content representative of graphical information; and

a second presenter content display region for displaying the graphical information represented by the streaming content from the second selected source, wherein the first and second presenter content display regions are adapted to display simultaneously; and

a classroom region for representing the audience member computer system coupled to the distributed learning server; and

a module for providing a second graphical display on the audience member computer system, the second graphical display comprising:

a first audience member content display region for displaying the graphical information represented by the streaming content from the first source selected by the content selection control; and

a second audience member content display region for displaying the graphical information represented by the streaming content from the second source selected by the content selection control, wherein the first and second audience member content display regions are adapted to display simultaneously.

Id. at col.10 ll.28–52, col.11 ll.26–62, col.12 ll.29–65.

B. Procedural History

Williamson accused Appellees of infringing the '840 patent based on their alleged manufacture, sale, offer for sale, use, and importation of various systems and methods of online collaboration. On March 22, 2011, Williamson filed suit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California specifically asserting infringement of all 24 claims of the '840 patent. On September 4, 2012, the district court issued a claim construction order, construing, inter alia, the following limitations of independent claims 1 and 17: “graphical display representative of a classroom” and “first graphical display comprising ... a classroom region” (collectively, the “graphical display” limitations). The district court held that these terms require “a pictorial map illustrating an at least partially virtual space in which participants can interact, and that identifies the presenter(s) and the audience member(s) by their locations on the map.”

In its claim construction order, the district court also concluded that the limitation of claim 8, “distributed learning control module,” was a means-plus-function term under 35 U.S.C. § 112, para. 6. The district court then evaluated the specification and...