Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 338 Filed 07/11/23 PageID.17211 Page 1 of 3
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
` Case No.: 21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`TENTATIVE REVISED CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTION ORDER
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`TACTION TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`APPLE INC.,
`
`
`Presently before the Court is Defendant Apple Inc.’s Amended Motion for Summary
`
`Judgment (“Mot.,” ECF Nos. 299 (public), 313 (sealed)), which is set for oral argument on
`Thursday, July 13, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 3A. In light of the arguments and
`positions presented in the Parties’ summary judgment briefing and attached expert reports,
`the Court issues the following tentative revised claim construction order. See In re Papst
`Licensing Digit. Camera Pat. Litig., 778 F.3d 1255, 1261 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“[A] district
`court may (and sometimes must) revisit, alter, or supplement its claim constructions . . . to
`the extent necessary to ensure that final constructions serve their purpose of genuinely
`clarifying the scope of claims for the finder of fact.” (citing O2 Micro Int’l Ltd. v. Beyond
`Innovation Tech. Co., 521 F.3d 1351, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2008))); Conoco, Inc. v. Energy &
`Env’t Int’l, L.C., 460 F.3d 1349, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (“[D]istrict courts may engage in
`‘rolling claim construction, in which the court revisits and alters its interpretation of the
`
`1
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 338 Filed 07/11/23 PageID.17212 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`claim terms as its understanding of the technology evolves.’” (quoting Guttman, Inc. v.
`Kopykake Enters., Inc., 302 F.3d 1352, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2002))).
`
`At the July 13, 2023 hearing, the Parties should be prepared to discuss the following
`revised claim constructions:
`1.
`The Court tentatively construes the term “wherein the ferrofluid reduces at
`least a mechanical resonance within the frequency range of 40–200 Hz” as “wherein the
`ferrofluid reduces at least a mechanical resonance within the frequency range of 40–200
`Hz, and wherein the output of the transducer is highly damped (i.e., the output is
`substantially uniform or flat over the normal operating frequency range of the device), that
`highly damped output is achieved by the ferrofluid, and the transducer has a Q-factor of
`less than 1.5.”
`2.
`The Court tentatively construes the term “wherein the ferrofluid reduces the
`Q-Factor of the response of the apparatus over at least a portion of the frequency range of
`40–200 Hz” as “wherein the ferrofluid reduces the Q-Factor of the response of the
`apparatus over at least a portion of the frequency range of 40–200 Hz, and wherein the
`output of the transducer is highly damped (i.e., the output is substantially uniform or flat
`over the normal operating frequency range of the device), that highly damped output is
`achieved by the ferrofluid, and the transducer has a Q-factor of less than 1.5.”
`3.
`The Court tentatively construes the term “wherein the viscous ferrofluid
`reduces at least a resonance within a frequency range of 40–200Hz” as “wherein the
`viscous ferrofluid reduces at least a resonance within a frequency range of 40–200Hz, and
`wherein the output of the transducer is highly damped (i.e., the output is substantially
`uniform or flat over the normal operating frequency range of the device), that highly
`damped output is achieved by the viscous ferrofluid, and the transducer has a Q-factor of
`less than 1.5.”
`4.
`The Court tentatively construes the term “wherein the ferrofluid damps at least
`a resonance” as “wherein the ferrofluid damps at least a resonance, and wherein the output
`of the transducer is highly damped (i.e., the output is substantially uniform or flat over the
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`2
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 338 Filed 07/11/23 PageID.17213 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`normal operating frequency range of the device), that highly damped output is achieved by
`the ferrofluid, and the transducer has a Q-factor of less than 1.5.”
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: July 11, 2023
`
`
`
`_____________________________
`Honorable Todd W. Robinson
`United States District Judge
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`3
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`