Quincy's IP world

6愛的鼓勵 0訂閱站台

Definingthe Meanings of “Code” and “Continuously” in U.S. Patents related to CDMATechnology

Abstract InterDigital Communications, LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 2012 WL3104597 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2012), wasa decision made by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuitregarding a CDMA patent dispute. The key legal issue was claim construction oftwo disputed claim terms “code” and “increased power level.” To avoidinfringement, the defendants tried to limit “code” to “spreading code” and torequire the claimed invention to have a limitation that “the power level of acode signal increases during transmission.” But, the court rejected thosearguments and concluded that that a “code” was not limited to a “spread code”and that the claimed invention covered embodiments of discrete power increases. This paper is intended to commentthe court’s decision and to provide some practical suggestions. There are threesuggestions: (1) A drafter should add more dependent claims to broadenindependent claims; (2) A drafter should provide precise definitions of keytechnical terms to avoid misunderstandings; (3) A drafter should describe moredetails of the technical features of the claimed inventions.

• Keywords: CDMA, code division multiple access, patent,claim construction.

Presented at 2012光電與通訊工程研討會, http://ipc.ee.kuas.edu.tw/