Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Spring Networks,
Inc.
Addressing claim construction issues, a divided panel of the US
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a jury verdict of
infringement, holding that the district court's "plain and
ordinary meaning" construction failed to provide the jury with
a clear understanding of the disputed claim scope and that, under
the correct construction, no reasonable juror could find
infringement. Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Spring
Networks, Inc., Case No. 2015-1237 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 29, 2016)
(Prost, CJ) (Bryson, J, dissenting).
The patents at issue were directed to two-way communications
devices, and each incorporated the terms "mobile" and
"portable," which the parties agreed were synonymous. The
defendant argued that the disputed terms do not cover "fixed
or stationary products that are only theoretically capable
of being moved." The plaintiff, by contrast, argued that the
terms should be given their
