Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GLOBESPANVIRATA, INC. v. TEXAS INSTRUMENT

April 6, 2005.

GLOBESPANVIRATA, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
TEXAS INSTRUMENT, INC., THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY and its BOARD OF TRUSTEES, and STANFORD UNIVERSITY OTL, LLC, Defendants. TEXAS INSTRUMENT, INC., Counterclaimant, v. GLOBESPANVIRATA, INC. and CONEXANT SYSTEMS, INC., Counterclaim Defendants.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: GARRETT BROWN, District Judge

MARKMAN ORDER

This matter having come before the Court upon motions to construe certain disputed claim terms in the patents-in-suit; and having reviewed the parties' submissions and having considered the parties' arguments set forth at the Markman hearing which was held on January 31, 2005; and for the reasons set forth on the record;

IT IS THIS 6th of April, 2005 hereby

  ORDERED that the disputed claim terms have the following meanings:

  1. "a programmed and possibly frequency-variable transmit power mask" means "a programmed limit on the maximum amount of power to be transmitted in each of the several carriers which can vary by carrier";

  2. "the programmed power mask" means "a programmed limit on the maximum amount of power to be transmitted in each of the several carriers which can vary by carrier";

  3. "power or power-spectral-density constraint" means "an absolute limit in the transmitter power or a limit in maximum transmit power allowed at particular frequencies";

  4. "subcarrier-indexed estimates of transmission quality" does not require that the measurements of the estimates be determined by any of the four factors enumerated in the preamble;

  5. "sorting the subcarrier-indexed estimates of the transmission quality, scaled by the desired subcarrier bit-error-rates, into an invertible ordering" requires mere "sorting" of the estimates, i.e., segregating the estimates into groups based on specified criteria, and does not require reordering;

  6. "scaled" means "changed by a factor";

  7. "(b) calculating bit and energy allocation tables for said multicarrier data transmission system based on the sorted subcarrier-indexed estimates" means "steps (a) and (b) need not be performed in any particular order";

  8. "means for measuring the capability of the datalink to efficiently communicate the data bits in each said subchannel and for developing an optimum energy allocation and an optimum data bit allocation for each said subchannels" is a means-plusfunction limitation, but is indefinite because the specification fails to clearly link corresponding structure to the claimed functions, and is therefore invalid; 9. "means for returning an indication of the monitored quality to said transmitter means" is a means-plus-function limitation, but is indefinite because the specification fails to clearly link corresponding structure to the claimed function, and is therefore invalid;

  10. "means responsive to said indication of monitored quality and operative to change the data bit allocation among said subchannels to improve the quality of the transmission" is a means-plus-function limitation, but is indefinite because the specification fails to clearly link ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.