Addressing the issue of whether jury determinations of
invalidity and non-infringement were inconsistent where claim terms
had more than one possible "plain and ordinary meaning,"
the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the verdict
and the district court's subsequent denial of a new trial,
concluding that the patentee had waived any claim construction
arguments, that the determinations of non-infringement and
invalidity were consistent, and that any claim construction error
was harmless in light of the patentee's concessions regarding
invalidity. TVIIM, LLC v. McAfee, Inc., Case No. 16-1562
(Fed. Cir., Mar. 21, 2017) (Reyna, J).
TVIIM, a non-practicing entity, filed a patent infringement suit
against McAfee alleging that McAfee's "Program
Updates" product/feature infringed TVIIM's patent. The
asserted patent covers a method of providing a security assessment
for a computer by broadly undertaking the following steps:
identifying the configuration of a
