Codex Corp. v. Milgo Elec. Corp.
| Decision Date | 03 March 1982 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 76-793-S. |
| Citation | 534 F. Supp. 418 |
| Parties | CODEX CORPORATION and Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. MILGO ELECTRONIC CORPORATION and International Communications Corporation, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
Paul F. Ware, Jr., Goodwin, Procter & Hoar, Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs.
Marcus E. Cohn, and Cornelius J. Moynihan, Jr., Peabody & Brown, Boston, Mass., Harold L. Jackson, Jackson, Jones & Price, Tustin, Cal., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO AMEND FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs have moved to amend the court's Findings, Rulings and Order of June 12, 1981. Some of these proposed amendments correct predictable technical errors by the court and these have been adopted. Others go to the substance of findings, for some of which I have found support in the evidence, but some of which appear to add findings not expressly dealt with during the trial. The detailed resolution of these proposed amendments are as follows:
1. My memory of the evidence supports the original findings except that transmission at high speeds is not over telephone lines.
2-3. The suggested changes are not supported by the evidence.
4-5. A quibble duly adjusted.
6. A technical correction.
7. A technical correction which was not apparent in the evidence, but to which all parties agree.
8-9. These are technical corrections to which all parties agree.
10. I didn't articulate the difference between symmetrical and asymmetrical spectra, but the suggested amendment is consistent with the evidence and eminently sensible.
11. The precise dating suggested is not significant and I have omitted it.
12. The changed language in paragraph 7 on page 13 reflects the comments of both parties. The phrase "as nearly as possible" was taken from Mr. Whang's testimony.
13. See No. 27, infra.
14. I have combined the comments of the parties in the changes on page 15.
15-16. The reference to the WU 2247 as being the same as the 4400/24 PB was an error, and has been eliminated. The confusion occurred because both the WU 2247 and the 4400/24 PB were the versions of Milgo 4400/24 series.
17. Re-examination of the Milgo spectographs leads me to rewrite the first paragraph of page 17 as it appears in the amended findings. It also is true that the Kansas court's findings with respect to the 3300 and 2200 models referred to patents not at issue in this case.
18. The reference to a doctoral thesis was clearly an error and has been corrected to "master's".
19. The proposed amendment is adequately dealt with by changing "all" to "most".
20. The suggestion to use a more technically accurate description was agreed to by both parties and adopted.
21. The reference to prior art is footnoted.
22. The proposed amendment adds some accuracy.
23-24. I misread the opinion of the Kansas court with respect to the claims in dispute before it, being confused by the discussion of the fixed equalizer. The defendant is correct in its comment that claims of the '023 patent referring to the fixed equalizer were apparently not before that court. Conclusion 2 on pp. 31-32 has accordingly been entirely rewritten.
25. Rather than get into the obsolescence of fixed equalizers, about which the evidence was slight, I have eliminated the reference, which was superfluous in any case.
26. I do not accept the proposed amendment.
27. I was informed by counsel at the outset that I should concern myself with claims 1, 19 and 25 of the '023 patent. There was little, if any, discussion during the trial of the dependent claims. To the extent that the validity of the dependent claims rests on the assertion that the patent teaches narrow skirts, i.e., a composite filter characteristic of less than 50% roll-off, my finding that such a teaching is nowhere contained in the patent would collaterally estop these parties to assert validity on that basis. Accordingly, I do not adopt the proposed amendment.
28. The suggested amendment probably does eliminate the possibility of confusion between "band limiting" as ordinarily used and the special meaning given to the phrase by Mr. Whang. It has been adopted.
In accordance with the foregoing, the Findings, Rulings and Order entered June 12, 1981 are vacated, and Amended Findings, Rulings and Order reflecting the foregoing are filed herewith. The Declaratory Judgment heretofore entered is vacated. No judgment shall enter until the amount of the award of attorneys' fees has been determined and made a part of said judgment.
This is an action for a declaratory judgment establishing the invalidity of three patents held by the defendants (hereinafter collectively "Milgo") as assignees of the inventors:
By a supplemental complaint, plaintiffs (hereinafter collectively "Codex") sought a similar declaration with respect to Patent No. 3,943,285, Robert G. Ragsdale and Henry H. Parrish, but this patent was withdrawn from the case prior to the trial.
The defendants have by answer and counterclaim asserted the validity of their patents, alleged infringement of their patents and seek injunctive relief and damages. Both sides claim they are entitled to attorneys' fees.
During the trial I ordered summary judgment for the plaintiff on the Ragsdale '503 on the basis of the admission by Mr. Ragsdale that the only novelty in his patent was in a claim which was not at issue in this case.
The patents in issue deal with devices called modems, the function of which is to convert the discrete digital signals of computers into analogue signals suitable for transmission over telephone lines, and at the receiving end, to convert the analogue signals back to digital signals which can be "read" by the receiving computer. "Modem" is short for "modulator-demodulator."
Computer signals are binary, that is, they consist of but two electrical impulses, one positive, one negative, usually represented as "1" and "0". Each 1 or 0 is known as a "bit." Information, or "data," is coded by assigning words, letters or numerical values to various combinations of bits. Common coding practice employs the "tribit," a "word" consisting of three bits. Combinations of tribits are then transmitted according to a pre-set code to convey data. There are eight available tribits: 000, 001, 011, 111, 101, 110, 100, and 010.
A modem which can transmit eight identifiable signals can transmit tribits; a modem which can transmit only four identifiable signals can transmit only dibits, 01, 11, 10, 00; a modem which can transmit only two identifiable signals can transmit only the single bit "words", 1 and 0. Use of tribits obviously increases the range and speed of data transmission.
The aim of modem designers is to increase the speed of transmittal so that the capacity of large computers, which are capable of processing data at the rate of 150,000 bits per second ("bps"), may be fully utilized by remote terminals. Such speeds may be approached over special private or leased lines which are tuned to provide minimal signal distortion over a wide range of frequencies. Such lines are expensive. Accordingly, the focus of design efforts over the last twenty years has been to create a modem capable of transmitting large quantities of data per second over the ordinary dial telephone lines.
Problems of the Telephone Network.
The commercial telephone system is designed to transmit signals in the frequency range from 300 to 3000 Hertz (Hz) or cycles per second, known as the voice band. At the upper and lower ends of this frequency range the telephone systems exhibit characteristics of amplitude distortion and delay distortion. Since the signals transmitted by modems are distinguishable by minute differences of amplitude and timing, these distortion characteristics are fatal to accurate transmission of data. These distortions may be corrected by equalizers, which retard and suppress the fast and strong signals to the level of the signals in the frequencies in which there is the most distortion. Unfortunately, every pair of telephone lines has different distortion characteristics, and because of the automatic routing system in the national distance dial telephone network, it is impossible to predict what distortion characteristics will appear in a given transmission. There are three types of equalizers which have been used to deal with this problem: (1) the adjustable equalizers, which must be manually tuned for each transmission, (2) the fixed compromise equalizer employed by Whang in his '023 patent, and (3) the automatic adaptive equalizer used by the plaintiff, Codex, and also by the defendant in its present line of modems.
The central range of the voice band is relatively free from distortion, however, and less stringent equalization is required to transmit accurately in this range, referred to at trial as the "sweet spot." In the early 1960's, when the modem described in the '023 patent was devised, the "sweet spot" was thought to be a band about 1000Hz in range between the frequencies of 1200Hz and 2200Hz. Since that time the telephone network has improved and the usable "sweet spot" for modems may be somewhat wider.
The carrier of the signal is an alternating current which is ordinarily depicted as a sine wave, the undulations of which reflect the positive-negative alternations of energy:
In fact, however, the wave form should be visualized as a helix, like the thread of a cylindrical bolt. This is important in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Codex Corp. v. Milgo Electronic Corp., s. 82-1644
...the ground that the amount of attorney fees awarded it was too low. The district court opinion is reported, Codex Corp. v. Milgo Electronic Corp., 534 F.Supp. 418, 432 (D.Mass.1982). The dispute revolves around three patents, all owned by Milgo as (1) No. 3,524,023, Sang Y. Whang, inventor,......
-
United Business Communications v. Racal-Milgo, Inc.
...again at issue in a lawsuit filed in 1976 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Codex Corp. v. Milgo Electronic Corp., 534 F.Supp. 418 ("Codex"). In that lawsuit, the plaintiff sought to have the Whang '023 patent declared invalid and unenforceable against t......
-
Rixon Inc. v. Racal-Milgo, Inc.
...invalid and awarding attorneys' fees against Milgo for its inequitable conduct with respect to that patent. Codex Corp. v. Milgo Electronic Corp., 534 F.Supp. 418 (D.Ma.1982). Relying upon principles of non-mutual collateral estoppel,8 Rixon has supplemented its complaint to allege that Mil......