The order in Technology Innovations, LLC v. Amazon, Inc., 2014 WL 1292093 (D. Del. March 31, 2014) is here. It’s a nice order addressing what appears to be a very overly aggressive claim construction position by the patentee, where it asserted that its patent covered Amazon’s Kindle. This picture perhaps explains the result:
The opinion points out that Amazon in its brief had cited the NYT Op-ed I co-wrote with Chief and Prof. Chief to support the argument that section 285 sanctions may be proper where a litigant “distorts a patent claim far beyond its plain meaning and precedent for the purpose of raising the legal costs of the defense.”
Hmmm….interesting. Claim construction rising to Rule 11.
Sometimes one has to wonder.
Comments are closed.