Federal Circuit Rules for AT&T in Networking Patent Dispute
Written August 13, 2019
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on August 12, 2019, affirmed a lower court’s ruling that AT&T Mobility LLC and Ericsson Inc. didn’t infringe Iridescent Networks Inc.’s networking patent. Iridescent Networks Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Fed. Cir., No. 18-1449, 8/12/19. The patent described a system for providing bandwidth on demand for applications while minimizing data delay and loss during transmission.
During claim construction proceedings, Iridescent proposed broadly construing the term “high quality of service connection” to mean “a connection in which one or more quality of service connection parameters, including bandwidth, latency, and/or packet loss, are assured from end-to-end based on the requirements of the application.” However, the lower court defined the term as a connection that assures speeds of at least one megabit per second in ruling against Iridescent.
The parties agreed the definition excluded AT&T’s products and services. But Iridescent argued that the term shouldn’t be limited to the patent’s minimum connection requirements and appealed. The Federal Circuit agreed with the lower court definition and affirmed the judgment.
During claim construction proceedings, Iridescent proposed broadly construing the term “high quality of service connection” to mean “a connection in which one or more quality of service connection parameters, including bandwidth, latency, and/or packet loss, are assured from end-to-end based on the requirements of the application.” However, the lower court defined the term as a connection that assures speeds of at least one megabit per second in ruling against Iridescent.
The parties agreed the definition excluded AT&T’s products and services. But Iridescent argued that the term shouldn’t be limited to the patent’s minimum connection requirements and appealed. The Federal Circuit agreed with the lower court definition and affirmed the judgment.