"On appeal here, the Federal Circuit has vacated and remanded, holding the district court erred by implicitly construing a disputed claim term against the patentee without first providing an opportunity to be heard on claim construction. Although pleading standards have shifted against patentees in recent years, this case is an important reminder that even legal questions require procedural fairness. Although claim construction has been (almost entirely) a question of law for the court since Markman, that designation does not bypass ordinary due process requirements."
"Adnexus sued Meta in the Western District of Texas, alleging that Meta's "Lead Ads" product infringes U.S. Patent No. 8,719,101, which claims a system for delivering targeted online advertisements. The key dispute on appeal centered on claim limitation [1f], which requires retrieving a "user profile" containing "delivery method preferences and demographic information." Adnexus alleged that when a Facebook user clicks on a Lead Ad, Meta's system checks cookies on the user's device and retrieves profile information."
Adnexus sued Meta in the Western District of Texas alleging that Meta's Lead Ads product infringes U.S. Patent No. 8,719,101, which claims a system for delivering targeted online advertisements. The disputed limitation required retrieving a user profile containing delivery method preferences and demographic information. Adnexus alleged Meta's system checks cookies and retrieves profile information to populate prefilled forms. Meta moved to dismiss, arguing contact information is distinct from delivery method preferences. The district court construed the term against Adnexus and dismissed with prejudice. The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded, holding that adopting a dispositive construction without notice and an opportunity to be heard violated ordinary due process.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]