Judge Sleet Construes Claims as Plain and Ordinary Meaning
April 28, 2016
Publication| Intellectual Property
In Ioengine, LLC v. Interactive Media Corp. d/b/a Kanguru Solutions et al., C.A. No. 14-1571-GMS, Judge Sleet construed all disputed terms of the patent-in-suit as having plain and ordinary meaning. In construing the last of four claim terms, the Court declined to “construe terms that are already evident from reading the entire claim.” The Court found that “injecting additional limitations for particular terms independently will likely confuse the jury”; rather, these claim terms should be read and “considered in the context of the entire claim.” The Court declined to “impose further limitations on words that already have a clear meaning within the context of the whole claim.”
Analysis: The Court will decline to impose limitations when construing a claim term if the meaning of the term is clear in the context of the entire claim.