No. 20-1545

TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited, et al. v. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2021-05-05
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: 35-usc-271 claim-construction industry-standard infringement judicial-precedent literal-infringement patent patent-infringement statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Patent JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-06-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a patentee may prove literal infringement by relying solely on the essentiality of its patent to an industry standard

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This Court’s precedent in Markman requires that the construction of a patent “is exclusively within the province of the court.” Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996). Consistent with this directive, courts determine claim construction—not juries. The jury applies the claims as construed and determines whether the accused product infringes. The questions presented in this case, properly stated, are: 1. Whether under 35 U.S.C. § 271 and this Court’s precedent, a patentee may prove literal infringement by relying solely on the essentiality of its patent to an industry standard, rather than comparing the accused product directly to the asserted claim or linking the industry standard to the claim during claim construction. 2. Whether a court must first determine claim construction and conclude as a matter of law that the scope of the asserted claims covers an industry standard and that a patentee may rely on an industry standard in proving literal infringement.

Docket Entries

2021-06-28
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-18
Reply of petitioners TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-06-03
Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari denied.
2021-05-28
Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from June 8, 2021 to June 16, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-05-28
Response to motion from respondent Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 filed.
2021-05-24
Brief of respondent Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 in opposition filed.
2021-05-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 4, 2021)

Attorneys

Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
Douglas Harry Hallward-DriemeierRopes & Gray, LLP, Respondent
Douglas Harry Hallward-DriemeierRopes & Gray, LLP, Respondent
TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited, et al.
Lionel Marks LavenueFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Petitioner
Lionel Marks LavenueFinnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Petitioner