`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PROXENSE, LLC,
` Plaintiff
`
`-v-
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC.,
` Defendant
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`
`
`6:21-CV-00210-ADA
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`ORDER
`Before the Court are the parties’ claim construction briefs. Plaintiff Proxense, LLC
`
`(hereinafter “Proxense”) submitted its Complaint for Patent Infringement and Demand for Jury
`
`Trial on April 23, 2021 (ECF No. 1). Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”) submitted the opening Markman Brief on
`
`October 28, 2021, and the Reply Markman Brief on December 6, 2021. (ECF Nos. 33, 37,
`
`respectively). Plaintiff submitted its response on November 17, 2021, and sur-reply brief (ECF
`
`Nos. 35, 39, respectively). The Court held the Markman hearing on December 27, 2021. (ECF No.
`
`42). This Order informs the parties of the Court’s constructions.
`
`I. Standard of Review
`
`Generally, courts construe claim terms according to their plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). The Federal Circuit applies
`
`a “heavy presumption” in favor of construing terms according to their plain and ordinary meaning,
`
`that is, the “meaning that the term would have to a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at
`
`the time of the invention.” Azure Networks, LLC v. CSR PLC, 771 F.3d 1336, 1347 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1
`
`MICROSOFT 1009
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00210-ADA Document 43 Filed 01/18/22 Page 2 of 5
`
`2014) (vacated on other grounds); Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1313. The “only two exceptions to [the]
`
`general rule” that claim terms are construed according to their plain and ordinary meaning are
`
`when the patentee acts as his own lexicographer or disavows the full scope of the claim term either
`
`in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Computer Entm’t Am. LLC, 669 F.3d
`
`1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). To act as his own lexicographer, the patentee must “clearly set forth
`
`a definition of the disputed claim term,” and “clearly express an intent to define the term.” Id. at
`
`1365. To disavow the full scope of a claim term, the patentee’s statements in the specification or
`
`prosecution history must represent “a clear disavowal of claim scope.” Id. at 1366. Accordingly,
`
`when “an applicant’s statements are amenable to multiple reasonable interpretations, they cannot
`
`be deemed clear and unmistakable.” 3M Innovative Props. Co. v. Tredegar Corp., 725 F.3d 1315,
`
`1326 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
`
`While the specification “may aid the court” in analyzing disputed language in a claim,
`
`“particular embodiments and examples appearing in the specification will not generally be read
`
`into the claims.” Comark Commc’ns, Inc. v. Harris Corp., 156 F.3d 1182, 1187 (Fed. Cir. 1998)
`
`(internal citations omitted). Absent a “clear indication in the intrinsic record that the patentee
`
`intended the claims to be…limited,” courts do not read limitations found in the specification into
`
`the claims. Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v. Medrad, Inc., 358 F.3d 898, 913 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
`
`NO. Claim Term
`
`1
`
`Persistently storing
`. . . a tamper proof
`format written to a
`storage
`element on the
`integrated device
`
`Plaintiff’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`No construction
`necessary or
`possible, plain and
`ordinary meaning
`
`II. Discussion
`Defendant’s
`Proposed
`Construction
`Permanently storing
`in a form that
`prevents
`subsequent writing
`to store new data or
`
`Court’s Final
`Construction
`
`No construction
`necessary or
`possible, plain and
`ordinary meaning
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00210-ADA Document 43 Filed 01/18/22 Page 3 of 5
`
`that is unable to be
`subsequently
`altered”
`(730:1, 15) / “a
`tamper proof
`format written to
`the memory that is
`unable to
`be subsequently
`altered” (730:8).
`“device ID code”
`(730:1, 3, 8, 10, 12,
`15) / “ID Code”
`(905:1-3, 8-11, 13-
`14; 989:1-2, 4-8)
`“receiving an access
`message from the
`agent allowing the
`user access to an
`application” (Claims
`1, 8, 15) / “receiving
`an access message
`from the agent”
`(Claim 12)
`“access message”
`(Claims 1, 8, 12, 15)
`
`“wherein the
`biometric data and
`the scan data are
`both based on a
`fingerprint scan by
`the user” (Claim 5).
`“hybrid device”
`(Claims 1-12,15, 20).
`
`“Personal digital
`key” (Claims 1, 10).
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`modifications to
`existing data
`
`A unique code
`identifying a device
`
`The device-specific
`code that identifies
`the device
`
`A unique code
`identifying a device
`
`No construction
`necessary or possible,
`plain and ordinary
`meaning.
`
`A signal or
`notification enabling
`or announcing access
`
`Receiving a signal
`from the agent
`permitting a user to
`access an application,
`/ Receiving a signal
`from the agent
`permitting a user to
`access.
`A signal permitting a
`user to access.
`
`No construction
`necessary
`
`A signal or notification
`enabling or
`announcing access
`
`No construction
`needed, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`Invalid under §112 ¶4 No construction
`needed, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`Indefinite
`
`A device that
`includes an antenna,
`a transceiver for
`communicating with
`the RDC and a
`controller and
`memory for storing
`
`A device comprising
`an integrated personal
`digital key (PDK) and
`an integrated receiver-
`decoder circuit.
`An operably connected
`collection of elements
`including an antenna
`and a transceiver for
`communicating with a
`RDC and a controller
`and memory for
`
`A device comprising
`an integrated personal
`digital key (PDK) and
`an integrated receiver-
`decoder circuit.
`An operably
`connected collection
`of elements including
`an antenna and a
`transceiver for
`communicating with a
`RDC and a controller
`and memory for
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00210-ADA Document 43 Filed 01/18/22 Page 4 of 5
`
`information
`particular to a user.
`The fingerprint,
`palm print, retinal
`scan, iris scan,
`photograph,
`signature, voice
`sample, or
`DNA/RNA
`information that
`uniquely identifies
`an individual.
`Purchasing account
`numbers, such as the
`debit card, ATM
`card, or bank
`account numbers.
`
`A device that
`provides a wireless
`interface to the PDK.
`
`storing information
`particular to a user
`No construction
`necessary, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`No construction
`necessary, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`A component or
`collection of
`components, capable
`of wirelessly receiving
`data in an encrypted
`format and decoding
`the encrypted data for
`processing.
`
`Information that is
`received from a
`predecessor device.
`
`Information passed
`from a first device to a
`second device for use
`by the second device.
`
`No construction
`needed.
`
`No construction
`needed.
`
`8
`
`9
`
`“biometric
`information”
`(Claims 1, 4, 10, 13).
`
`storing information
`particular to a user.
`No construction
`necessary, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`“financial
`information”
`(Claims 5, 6, 14, 17).
`
`No construction
`necessary, plain and
`ordinary meaning.
`
`10
`
`“receiver-decoder
`circuit” (Claims 1,
`10).
`
`11
`
`“inheritance
`information”
`(Claims 9, 18 (not
`asserted)).
`
`12
`
`“enablement signal”
`(Claims 10-12, 17)
`
`Alternatively,
`information about the
`transaction utilized to
`verify, authorize, or
`complete a
`transaction.
`A component
`or collection
`of
`components,
`capable of
`wirelessly
`receiving data
`in an
`encrypted
`format and
`decoding the
`encrypted
`data for
`processing.
`Information
`passed from a
`first device to
`a second
`device for use
`by the second
`device.
`A message
`that enables or
`authorizes
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00210-ADA Document 43 Filed 01/18/22 Page 5 of 5
`
`Alternatively, a
`signal that
`authorizes.
`
`SIGNED this 18th day of January, 2022.
`
`5
`
`