"Akamai Technologies, Inc. sued MediaPointe in 2022, seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of MediaPointe's U.S. Patent No. 8,559,426 and its child, U.S. Patent No. 9,426,195. MediaPointe counterclaimed for infringement of both patents and Akamai counterclaimed for judgment of invalidity of all claims of both patents. During claim construction proceedings, Akamai argued that certain claim limitations reciting "best" or "optimal" routes or "best situated" nodes were indefinite,"
"MediaPointe also said that the limitations "optimal" and "best" were not indefinite because the specification indicated how to "generate trace-route results and grounds the words 'best' and 'optimal' in the numerical, objective trace-route results, including latency, number of hops, and transmission reliability." The district court, however, found that "the specification 'fails to provide a procedure or any other detail explaining how to consistently use [ ] hop[, ]latency[, and] reliability information to determine 'optimal/best' routes.'""
The Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision affirming a district court ruling that found MediaPointe's streaming-technology patent claims either indefinite or not infringed. Akamai sued for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and counterclaimed that the patents were invalid; MediaPointe counterclaimed for infringement. Disputed claim terms included "best," "optimal," and "best situated" regarding routes and nodes. MediaPointe argued the specification tied those terms to objective trace-route metrics like latency, hops, and reliability. The district court found the specification failed to provide a consistent procedure for using those metrics and cited an expanded range of factors that increased ambiguity.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]