CDN Innovations, LLC v. Grande Communications Networks, LLC

• Decision Date: 13 August 2021
• Docket Number: Civil 4:20-CV-653-SDJ
• Parties: CDN INNOVATIONS, LLC v. GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS, LLC
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas

CDN INNOVATIONS, LLC v. GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS, LLC

Civil No. 4:20-CV-653-SDJ

United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division

August 13, 2021

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SEAN D. JORDAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On June 28, 2021, the Court held a hearing to determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms in United States Patent No. 7, 293, 291 (“the '291 Patent”) U.S. Patent No. 7, 565, 699 (“the '699 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6, 865, 532 (“the '532 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7, 164, 714 (“the '714 Patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 6 311, 180 (“the '180 Patent”) (collectively “the Asserted Patents”). Having considered the parties' oral arguments, the parties' written arguments (Dkt. #28, Dkt. #41, Dkt. #43), the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, and the relevant law, the Court issues this Claim Construction Order. See Teva Pharms. USA v Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. 318, 331-32, 135 S.Ct. 831, 190 L.Ed.2d 719 (2015); Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 1

I. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 4

II. APPLICABLE LAW .................................................................................................. 9

A. Claim Construction ........................................................................ 9

B. Definiteness Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2 (pre-AIA) / § 112(b) (AIA) ............................................................................................. 12

C. Departing from the Ordinary Meaning of a Claim Term .......... 13

D. Means-Plus-Function Limitations .............................................. 15

III. CONSTRUCTION OF AGREED TERMS .................................................................... 16

IV. CONSTRUCTION OF DISPUTED TERMS ................................................................. 16

A. “blocking logic” and “detection logic”/ “detecting logic” .............. 17

B. “embedded” .................................................................................. 33

C. “auto-sensing” .............................................................................. 38

D. “Ethernet port” ............................................................................ 41

E. “the idle time activity threshold” ................................................ 45

F. “the blocking logic is further adapted to allow communications to be sent over the first interface to at least one other end-user computer in the local area network” ........................................... 50

G. “unique identifier” ....................................................................... 51

H. “generating a plurality of unique identifiers by selecting one or more word from each set for each word slot for each identifier such that a concatenating of the selected words in the predetermined order form the unique identifier” ....................... 55

I. “common storage” ............................................................................ 59

J. “verifying the unique identifiers using a common storage device” ...................................................................................................... 61

K. “recognizing a particular unique identifier with a speech recognizer” ................................................................................... 65

L. “a descriptor corresponding to each secondary signal characterizing the corresponding primary video signal” ........... 66

M. “multiplexing the plurality of coded video signals with the plurality of coded sub-sampled video signals associated with their additional data to provide an output video signal” ........... 69

N. “mosaic” ........................................................................................ 72

O. “providing one or more source contents in a predetermined format” ......................................................................................... 76

P. “recognizing the display limitations of the display device from a first information source” (Claim 1) and “determining the viewing preferences of the user from a second information source” (Claim 1) ....................................................................................... 80

Q. “selecting one or more preferred display contents from the source contents by a mapping system in conformance with the display limitations and the viewing preferences” ...................... 84

R. “viewing preferences” .................................................................. 89

V. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 93

I. Background

Plaintiff CDN Innovations, LLC, (“CDN”) alleges that Defendant Grande Communications Networks, LLC (“Grande”) has infringed and continues to infringe the Asserted Patents.^[1]

The '291 and '699 Patents

The '291 and '699 Patents are both titled “System and Method for Detecting Computer Port Inactivity.” The '291 Patent issued on November 6, 2007, and was filed on July 18, 2003. The '699 Patent is a continuation of the '291 Patent. It was issued on July 21, 2009, and was filed on August 30, 2007. The '291 and '699 Patents generally relate “to broadband communications, and particularly to a system and method for detecting an unattended or idle PC with an open data port.” '291 Patent col. 1 ll. 6-8; '699 Patent col. 1 ll. 13-15.

The Abstract of the '699 Patent states:

A system and method for detecting computer port inactivity are disclosed. In one embodiment, a system includes a router that has a first interface to communicate with a first connection at an end-user computer and a second interface to communicate with a second connection at a distributed computer network. The system includes detection logic responsive to the first interface to detect inactivity at the end-user computer and further includes blocking logic responsive to the detection logic. The blocking logic is operable to selectively initiate a blocking signal to disable communicating data received at the second interface to the end-user computer via the first interface. The detection logic and the blocking logic are embedded within a port of the router.

Claim 1 of the '291 Patent is an illustrative claim and recites the following elements (disputed terms in italics):

1. A system comprising:

a router, including: a first interface to communicate with a local area network connection at an end user computer;

a second interface to communicate with a wide area network connection to at [sic] a distributed computer network;

detection logic responsive to the first interface, the detection logic to detect user inactivity at the end-user computer; and

blocking logic responsive to the detection logic, the blocking logic to selectively initiate a blocking signal to disable communications received at the second interface from being sent over the first interface to the end-user computer; wherein

the detection logic and the blocking logic are embedded within an auto-sensing Ethernet port of the router.

'291 Patent col. 5 ll. 10-27.

Claim 1 of the '699 Patent is an illustrative claim and recites the following elements (disputed terms in italics):

1. A system comprising: a router, including:

a first interface to communicate with a first connection at an end-user computer;

a second interface to communicate with a second connection at a distributed computer network;

detection logic responsive to the first interface to detect inactivity at the end-user computer; and

blocking logic in response to said detection logic, the blocking logic to selectively initiate a blocking signal to disable communicating data received at the second interface to the end-user computer via the first interface,

wherein the detection logic and the blocking logic are embedded within a port of the router.

'699 Patent col. 5 ll. 14-26.

The '532 Patent

The '532 Patent, titled “Method for Recognizing Spoken Identifiers Having Predefined Grammars, ” issued on March 8, 2005, and was filed on September 19, 2001. The '532 Patent generally relates “to voice operated communication devices, and more particularly to recognizing spoken identifiers.” '532 Patent col. 1 ll. 7-9.

The Abstract of the '532 Patent states:

A method for selecting and recognizing spoken identifiers first defines a phrase having word slots. The word slots are arranged in the phrase in a predetermined order and according to a predetermined grammatical structure of a target language. A set of unique words selected from the target language is assigned to each word slot in the phrase according to the grammatical structure. Then, a unique identifiers [sic] can be generated by selecting one word from each set for each slot for each identifier such that a concatenating of the selected words in the predetermined order form the unique identifier.

Claim 1 of the '532 Patent is an illustrative claim and recites the following elements (disputed terms in italics):

1. A method for selecting and recognizing spoken identifiers comprising:

defining a phrase having a plurality of word slots, the plurality of word slots arranged in the phrase in a predetermined order and according to a predetermined grammatical structure of a target language;

associating a set of unique words with each word slot, the words in each set selected from the target language according to the grammatical structure;

generating a plurality of unique identifiers by selecting one word from each set for each word slot for each identifier such that a concatenating of the selected words in

...