`
`UNITED STATES DISTRiCT COURT
`
`QiSTRICT (3F MASSACHUSETTS
`
`CiV’iL ACTION NO. C3041 1851nRWZ
`
`AKAMAI TECHNQLOGiEs, WC. and
`MASSACHUSETTS INSTTTUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
`
`v.
`
`DiGiTAL $SLANB, INC.
`
`and
`
`DiGETAL ISLAND; JNQ,
`
`v.
`
`AKAMN TECHNQLOGCESi INC. and
`MASSACHUSETTS INBTiTUTE OF TEGHNOLOGY
`
`ORDER RmARthg CLAEM COmSTRUCTIQN
`
`NOVEMBER 8, 2013*:
`
`ZGBEL, DJ.
`
`The parties have requested {he Court is construe cadafin ciaém {anguage in US.
`
`Paten’t No. 6,1083% ("tha "/03 Patent"), 1.1.8. 9319M No, 6,003,030 (”me ‘030 Patent")
`
`and US. Patant Md 5978391 (”The ‘?91 Patent"). Both Flames have filed briefs
`
`sffering auggesiad interpretafidm 9% "(ha déspumd ciaim terms; and they advocated their
`
`raspactive interpretations a”: a Markman hearing an October 25, 2601, held pumuant to
`
`the deoisicsn in Markmag v. Westfiw Ms’tmmams, inch, 52 F.3d 967 (Fed. Ck: “1996),
`
`fig 517 £18. 370 {1996). Having reviewed the parties' argumantg and considered the
`
`centrai ciaim terms at isgue, I cans’true theae terms as indicated beé-ow.
`
`In tha interest
`
`{If tima, and givan the padies‘ concerns regardi
`
`
`
`Case 1:00—cv—11851~RWZ Document 137 Filed 11/08/01 Page 2 of 2
`
`construction new withaul an explanatary memmandum, An acmmpanying
`
`memerafidum will fellew a? a laler date.
`
`
`figwtr‘uctlcn af Terms Lmthe 11°63 Miami:
`
`"tagging”
`
`pravldlng a "painter" or "Mark" 30 the: the abject resalves m a
`demain other than the centem provider domain
`
`"in reserve to
`a dwmaia Other
`than the aentent
`
`previdar clemaln"
`
`“resolving me
`ARL t0 identify a
`content gamer"
`
`to magnify a partlcular group 0f cemputera {hat (3088 net include
`the content pmvlder from whlerh an aptimal server is ta: he seleeiecl
`
`identifying: an El? addrese fer a sspeciflc moment server in the
`network using one car more DNS lwskups
`
`'
`
`Cnnstwatlan of Terms. in the '{339 Patent;
`
`"netwerk
`traffic £68?"
`
`teal pefiormed by any entity on the "Meat“ side of the network
`:0 evaluate traffic er“: the nelwark
`
`Qunstmctiw of Terms in the ”791 Patent:
`
`"subgtantially
`unique identifier"
`
`an ldefitity far a data item generated by processmg} all 9f the
`data in the data item: and cmlythel data in the dam item, thmuglfi
`an algerfithm
`
`“maxing the
`identifier"
`
`employing the unique iclentlfier of file data item, with m" wfimut
`other lnformatian, to carry out the malted functlan
`
`At the tlme affine Mammal} hearing, the parties had abandoned a {lumber of
`
`Cialms relaiing t0 the "(’91 patent and dial mt appear {0 have a commen understanding
`
`33 is which additional claim terms were silll in digpute. The parties? written and oral
`
`preeentatlom gaffer little: asslss’lafica in We regafdl
`
`l therefam limit my falling m €319
`
`lemma
`
`abme,
`
`,f‘x
`
`rrrr
`7 W
`/ f
`
`l
`q
`~
`
`Fly/him ZQBEL
`”
`
`we [3 STATES DlSTRlCT comm
`
`