Opinion
Case No. 5:15-cv-02934-PSG
06-02-2016
HVAC TECHNOLOGY LLC, Plaintiff, v. SOUTHLAND INDUSTRIES, Defendant.
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ORDER
(Re: Docket No. 27)
Largely unseen and unsung, heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems provide warmth in the winter and relief in the summer in office buildings worldwide, including this very courthouse. This dispute gives HVAC systems their moment: Plaintiff HVAC Technology LLC alleges that Defendant Southland Industries infringes both U.S. Patent Nos. 7,444,731 and 7,478,761. The parties submitted ten terms and phrases in claims in the '731 and '761 patents for construction, and the court issued a summary order last month. The court explained that a more complete order would follow providing its reasoning. The court now does just that.
See Docket Nos. 27, 38.
See Docket No. 38 at 2.
I.
This case is about methods of transporting HVAC piping structures and HVAC flow control systems.
The '731 patent was filed on Dec. 6, 2006 and issued on Nov. 4, 2008. The '731 patent claims a method for "transporting an HVAC pipe assembly" and a method for "supporting an HVAC pipe assembly," each requiring a bracket. Figure 1 illustrates a bracket "for mounting or transporting pipe or conduit with a built-in handle."
See Docket No. 31-3 at 1.
Id. at col. 5 ll. 5-15, 37-45.
Id. at col. 2 ll. 32-33.
Image materials not available for display.
Figure 1 shows a bracket 100 that "includes body 110, arms 120 with support guides 130." "Base 150 connects to body 110 and allows for bracket 100 to be mounted to a surface," such as a duct.
Id. at col. 2 ll. 33-34.
Id. at col. 2 ll. 62-63.
Claim 1 of the '731 patent reads:
1. A method of transporting an HVAC pipe assembly, comprising:
securing the HVAC pipe assembly to a bracket;
mounting the bracket to an HVAC duct;
positioning the bracket proximate to a transporting surface;
loading the bracket to the transporting surface;
transporting the HVAC pipe assembly by transporting the transporting surface;
maintaining alignment of the HVAC pipe assembly to the HVAC duct with the bracket while transporting the HVAC pipe assembly.
Id. at col. 5 ll. 5-15.
The '761 patent was filed on Mar. 6, 2002 and issued on Jan. 20, 2009. The '761 patent claims a "ventilation flow control unit" and methods of "installing a ventilation flow control unit." Figure 1 illustrates a "ventilation flow control system 100" that includes "a supply flow control unit 102, a return flow control unit 104, an exhaust flow control unit 106, a master controller 108, one or more sensors 110, and a user interface 112."
See Docket No. 31-2.
Id. at sheet 1, col. 3 ll. 40-46,
Image materials not available for display.
FIG. 1
Claim 1 of the '761 patent reads:
1. A ventilation flow control unit comprising:
a plenum;
a flow controller mounted to said plenum;
an isolation valve fixed to said plenum to selectively block the flow of air between said plenum and said flow controller; and
a flow sensor mounted to said plenum; and
wherein said plenum, said flow controller, said isolation valve, and said flow sensor are preassembled to form said ventilation flow control unit, thereby enabling said ventilation flow control unit to be installed in an HVAC system as a single unit.
Id. at col. 7 ll. 7-18.
After the Markman hearing, the court construed the disputed claim terms as follows:
See Docket Nos. 37, 38.
| Patent Nos. | Claim Term/Phrase | Construction |
|---|---|---|
| '731 | "bracket" | "a structure having a body, an arm coupled to thebody, a support guide located within the arm andconfigured to provide support to a pipe, a basecoupled to the body and configured to attach to aplatform, the base further configured to providesupport to the body" |
| '761 | "protection bracket" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '731,'761 | "mounting (in/to) /mounted (in/to/on)" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '731 | "loading . . . to" | "physically attaching . . . to, setting . . . in or on, orengaging . . . to or with" |
| '761 | "ventilation flow controlunit" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '731 | "HVAC pipe assembly" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '761 | "preassembled /preassembling" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '731 | "positioning / positioning. . . proximate to" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '731 | "transporting surface" | plain and ordinary meaning |
| '761 | "riser" | plain and ordinary meaning |
II.
This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. The parties further consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a).
See Docket Nos. 8, 15.
Eleven years after the Federal Circuit's seminal Phillips decision, the canons of claim construction are now well-known—if not perfectly understood—by both parties and courts. "To construe a claim term, the trial court must determine the meaning of any disputed words from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art at the time of filing." This requires a careful review of the intrinsic record comprised of the claim terms, written description and prosecution history of the patent. While claim terms "are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning," the claims themselves and the context in which the terms appear "provide substantial guidance as to the meaning of particular claim terms." Indeed, a patent's specification "is always highly relevant to the claim construction analysis." Claims "must be read in view of the specification, of which they are part." In some cases, "the specification may reveal a special definition given to a claim term by the patentee that differs from the meaning it would otherwise possess. In such cases, the inventor's lexicography governs." Although the patent's prosecution history "lacks the clarity of the specification and thus is less useful for claim construction purposes," it "can often inform the meaning of the claim language by demonstrating how the inventor understood the invention and whether the inventor limited the invention in the course of prosecution, making the claim scope narrower than it would otherwise be." The court also has the discretion to consider extrinsic evidence, including dictionaries, learned treatises and testimony from experts and inventors. Such evidence, however, is "less significant than the intrinsic record in determining the legally operative meaning of claim language."
See Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc).
Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Lear Corp., 516 F.3d 1331, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
See id. ("To construe a claim term, the trial court must determine the meaning of any disputed words from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art at the time of filing. Intrinsic evidence, that is the claims, written description, and the prosecution history of the patent, is a more reliable guide to the meaning of a claim term than are extrinsic sources like technical dictionaries, treatises, and expert testimony.") (citing Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1312).
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1312-15.
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 979 (Fed. Cir. 1995); see also Ultimax Cement Mfg. Corp v. CTS Cement Mfg. Corp., 587 F. 3d 1339, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1316 (citing CCS Fitness, Inc. v. Brunswick Corp., 288 F.3d 1359, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1317 (internal quotations omitted).
See id. ("Although we have emphasized the importance of intrinsic evidence in claim construction, we have also authorized district courts to rely on extrinsic evidence, which 'consists of all evidence external to the patent and prosecution history, including expert and inventor testimony, dictionaries, and learned treatises.'") (quoting Markman, 52 F.3d at 980).
Id. (citing C.R. Bard, Inc. v. U.S. Surgical Corp., 388 F.3d 858, 862 (Fed. Cir. 2004)) (internal quotations and additional citations omitted).
III.
The court explains its construction of the ten disputed claim terms as follows.
A. Issue #1: "bracket"
| CLAIM TERM #1 | |
|---|---|
| "bracket" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "a structure (body, arms with support guides)mounted to support at least one pipe" |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| "a structure having a body, an arm coupled to the body, a support guide located within the arm andconfigured to provide support to a pipe, a base coupled to the body and configured to attach to aplatform, the base further configured to provide support to the body" |
The term "bracket" appears in each independent claim of the '731 patent (claims 1, 9 and 18). The specification describes the '731 patent's invention as
a method of transporting a pipe mounted within a plurality of brackets, each bracket having a body, an arm coupled to the body, a support guide located within the arm and configured to provide support to the pipe, a base coupled to the body and configured to attach to a platform, the base further configured to provide support to the body.The court's construction of "bracket" is consistent with the specification's description of a bracket.
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 1 ll. 58-63.
HVAC Technology raises four disputes as to the construction of "bracket." First, HVAC Technology contends that no construction is necessary because people are familiar with brackets and the patentee did not manifest any intent to give a special definition of "bracket." Second, this construction does not include several common types of brackets and improperly imports limitations from the specification and examples of brackets given in the specification. Third, based on the intrinsic evidence, the construction must cover brackets that are flat and lack any bend. Fourth, the construction does not cover the protection bracket disclosed in the '761 patent.
See Docket No. 28 at 5; Docket No. 32 at 6-7.
See Docket No. 28 at 5; Docket No. 32 at 8-9.
See Docket No. 28 at 7-8; Docket No. 32 at 9-10.
See Docket No. 32 at 7-8.
The patent itself belies HVAC Technology's first argument: the patentee plainly manifested an intent to give a special definition of "bracket"—both the abstract and the specification define the brackets used in the invention. The specification describes the brackets used in the invention as
See Docket No. 31-3 at abstract, col. 1 ll. 58-66.
having a body, an arm coupled to the body, a support guide located within the arm and configured to provide support to the pipe, a base coupled to the body and configured to attach to a platform, the base further configured to provide support to the body.By describing the characteristics of the brackets used in the invention, the patentee gave the claim term "a special definition . . . that differs from the meaning it would otherwise possess." The court thus defers to the inventor's lexicography, which governs. Both an ordinary person and a POSITA may be "familiar with all manner of brackets in use around the house"—but the claimed invention does not involve all manner of brackets in the context of household use, but rather covers use of a bracket with certain characteristics in the specific context of transporting an HVAC pipe assembly. The patentee defined "bracket" to have certain characteristics, and so the term must be construed according to the definition given to it by the patentee.
Id. at col. 1 ll. 58-63.
See Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1316 (citing CCS Fitness, Inc., 288 F.3d at 1366).
Docket No. 28 at 4.
HVAC Technology's second argument relies on two false assumptions: first, that the construction of "bracket" must encompass all types of brackets, and second, that it is improper to consider the specification in construing "bracket." HVAC Technology describes several brackets used in plumbing and home use—for example, to permanently secure objects to walls—and argues that the construction of "bracket" must cover these brackets. HVAC Technology provides no explanation of how these brackets are relevant to the '731 patent's bracket, which has certain characteristics and is used not for permanently securing objects to walls, but for transporting and supporting HVAC pipe assemblies. HVAC Technology also provides no authority for its position that the construction of "bracket" must be so broad as to cover brackets that are not relevant to the purpose of the patent's claimed invention. The specification gave a particular definition of bracket, and Figure 2 of the '731 patent supports this definition of "bracket." It depicts a "[b]racket 200," which "includes body 210, arms 220 with support guides 230. . . . Base 250 connects to body 210." Contrary to HVAC Technology's assertion, it is entirely proper, and indeed necessary, for the court to look to the specification, which "is always highly relevant to the claim construction analysis."
See Docket No. 28 at 5; Docket No. 32 at 8-9.
Id. at col. 3 ll. 16-32.
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1312-15.
HVAC Technology's third argument is that based on the intrinsic evidence, the construction must cover brackets that are flat and lack any bend. HVAC Technology points to Figs. 18 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 6,951,324, the entire disclosures of which the '731 patent incorporates by reference. The construction adopted by the court does not require brackets to have a bend, L-shaped or otherwise. For example, Fig. 2 of the '731 patent depicts one embodiment of a bracket that is flat and has a body 210, arms 220 with support guides 230 and a base 250 that is configured to allow the bracket to be attached to a surface:
See Docket No. 28 at 7-8; Docket No. 32 at 9-10.
See Docket No. 31-3 at col. 1 ll. 7-12; Docket No. 28 at 7-8.
Docket No. 31-3 at Fig. 2, col. 3:16-32.
Image materials not available for display.
FIG. 2
HVAC Technology's fourth argument, that the construction must cover the "protection bracket" disclosed in the '761 patent, also lacks merit. The '731 and '761 patents do not incorporate each other by reference and are not related, and so there is no reason that the term "bracket" in the '731 patent must cover the term "protection bracket" in the '761 patent.
See Docket No. 32 at 7-8.
| CLAIM TERM #2 | |
|---|---|
| "protection bracket" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "a base with an opening to allow a valve stemto pass through it, as well as a pair of riserswhich extend upward to protect the valve" |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "protection bracket" appears in dependent claims 11, 12 and 23 of the '761 patent. Claim 11 claims a "ventilation flow control unit according to claim 8, further comprising a protection bracket mounted to protect said automatic valve from damage during transportation and installation of said ventilation flow control unit." Claim 12 limits the protection bracket in claim 11 as including "a base defining an opening to facilitate the passage of a valve stem; a first riser extending from a first edge of said base; and a second riser extending from a second edge of said base opposite said first edge. Claim 23 claims a "method of installing a ventilation flow control unit according to claim 21, wherein said step of mounting an automatic valve in said fluid line includes mounting a protective bracket around said automatic valve."
Docket No. 31-2 at col. 7 ll. 59-62.
Id. at col. 7 ll. 63-col. 8 ll. 2.
Id. at col. 8 ll. 60-63.
Southland argues that the plain and ordinary meaning is too broad and that in the context of the '761 patent, the protection bracket protects valves from being physically damaged by use of risers that extend farther away from the duct than the valves incorporated into the pipe assembly do, and so this limitation must be reflected in the construction. Neither the claims nor the specification, however, supports Southland's proposed construction. "Protection bracket" appears in claims 11 and 23, which do not provide any description or limitation of the protection bracket's characteristics or the means by which it functions. Claim 12 does limit "protection bracket" with limitations similar to Southland's proposed construction, but it is a dependent claim of claim 11. The "protection bracket" in claims 11 and 23 logically must have a broader meaning than that disclosed by claim 12.
See Docket No. 31 at 5-6.
Furthermore, claim terms "are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning," and the '761 patent's specification does not provide guidance on the meaning of "protection bracket." Fig. 6 depicts a protection bracket 226 that has a base portion 602 that defines an aperture 606 for the passage of an automatic stem valve, and that also has a pair of risers 604:
See Docket No. 31-2 at Fig. 6, col. 6 ll. 31-38.
Image materials not available for display.
FIG. 6
The specification states, however, that a POSITA "will recognize . . . that the invention may be practiced apart from [the] specific details" set forth in the description and figures. Fig. 6 depicts one embodiment of a protection bracket, such as that claimed by claim 12, but the specification does not reveal "an intentional disclaimer, or disavowal, of claim scope by the inventor."
| CLAIM TERM #3 | |
|---|---|
| "mounting (in/to) / mounted (in/to/on)" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Mount" means |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
Id. at col. 3 ll. 34-35.
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1316.
The term "mounting (in/to) / mounted (in/to/on)" appears in claims 1, 9 and 20 of the '731 patent and claims 1, 2, 7-11, 15-17, 21-29, 31, 33-35, 39 and 41-46 of the '761 patent. The specification of the '731 patent provides examples of "mounting" and states that a bracket 100 may be "mounted in any secure manner, for example welded, screwed, and bolted." The specification of the '761 patent does not address the definition of "mounting (in/to) / mounted (in/to/on)." Neither specification describes "mounting" as "attaching." Southland argues that the term should be construed as "attach," "attaching" or "attached," but does not explain why. The claim term thus is given its plain and ordinary meaning.
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 2 ll. 63-65.
| CLAIM TERM #4 | |
|---|---|
| "loading to" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| "loading . . . to" means setting a first object ona second object, or attaching a first object to asecond object, or hanging a first object from asecond object, or engaging a first object with asecond object, or containing a first object withina second object, or having a second object stickinto a hole in a first object, or having a secondobject somehow grasp a first object, such that ifthe second object is moved then the first objectwill also be moved, and therefore will betransported or moved along with the secondobject. The phrase "loading . . . to" does notrequire that the first object be attached to thesecond object. | "Loading . . . to" means physically attaching,setting, or engaging to. |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| physically attaching . . . to, setting . . . in or on, or engaging . . . to or with |
The term "loading to" appears in claim 1, 9 and 18 of the '731 patent. Independent claims 1 and 18 claim a "method of transporting an HVAC pipe assembly, comprising: . . . loading the bracket to the transporting surface." Independent claim 9 similarly claims a "method of supporting an HVAC pipe assembly, comprising: . . . loading the bracket to the transporting surface." Claim 8, which is a dependent claim of claim 1, and claim 19, which is a dependent claim of claim 18, state that the "transporting surface comprises a member selected from the group consisting of a human hand, a forklift, a lifting device, a shipping crate, a box, and a flatbed truck." Because independent claims 1, 9 and 18 use the language "loading the bracket to the transporting surface," and dependent claims specifically define the "transporting surface" as a human hand, a forklift, a lifting device, a shipping crate, a box and a flatbed truck, the construction of "loading . . . to" must encompass loading a bracket to each of those transporting surfaces.
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 5 ll. 5-15, col. 6 at ll. 27-37.
Id. at col. 5 ll. 37-45.
Id. at col. 5 ll. 33-36, col. 6 ll. 38-41.
HVAC Technology argues that Southland's proposed construction does not make it clear that putting something in a box or lifting something by a handle is covered by the term. The court's construction resolves these concerns, encompasses all of the various "transporting surfaces" disclosed in claims 8 and 19 and takes into consideration the fact that the invention is directed toward components of HVAC systems.
| CLAIM TERM #5 | |
|---|---|
| "ventilation flow control unit" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Ventilation flow control unit" means a sectionof a HVAC system made up of a plenum, aflow control sensor, a flow controller (e.g.,damper) and optionally a heating coil |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "ventilation flow control unit" appears in independent claims 1, 8, 16, 21, 25, 27, 42 and 44 of the '761 patent, and several dependent claims. Claims 1, 8, 16 and 44 each claim a "ventilation flow control unit comprising" various elements and claims 21, 25, 27 and 42 each claim a method of "installing a ventilation flow control unit."
See Docket No. 31-2 at col. 7 ll. 7-18, 38-52, col. 8 ll. 14-31, 46-54, col. 9 ll. 1-10, 16-25, col. 10 ll. 31-38, 43-57.
Southland argues that the claims define the term "ventilation flow control unit" and enumerate the component parts that are needed to make up a "ventilation flow control unit." This is precisely why the term needs no construction. "Ventilation flow control unit" appears in the preamble of each independent claim, and "a preamble is not limiting 'where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention.'" The patentee defined a structurally complete invention in the claim body of claims 1, 8, 16 and 44 by listing the limiting components of the ventilation flow control unit, and so the preamble is not limiting.
Docket No. 31 at 9-10.
Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc., 749 F.3d 1349, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
| CLAIM TERM #6 | |
|---|---|
| "HVAC pipe assembly" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "HVAC pipe assembly" means a portion of anHVAC system which includes ducts and pipes |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "HVAC pipe assembly" appears in independent claims 1, 9 and 18 and dependent claims 2, 10 and 11 of the '731 patent.
Southland argues that the word "HVAC" modifies the phrase "pipe assembly," and so the term must include a duct, because a pipe assembly that is not attached to a duct is a mere pipe assembly and not an HVAC pipe assembly. Southland refers to Fig. 4 of the '731 patent, which includes a duct 420. There is no basis for Southland's position, however, because the specification does not limit "HVAC pipe assembly" to include a duct. Fig. 4 and its accompanying description make this clear. Fig. 4 illustrates
See Docket No. 31 at 10.
two brackets supporting a pipe assembly ready for transport. . . . In FIG. 4, pipe assemblies 400 include 2 pipes and hardware, supporting by brackets 410. . . . Also illustrated . . . is duct 420, which may be transported with pipe assemblies 400. . . . [I]f pipe assemblies 400 are not attached to duct 420 then they may be transported on the base of brackets 410.Southland is correct that Fig. 4 includes a duct 420, but Fig. 4 depicts pipe assemblies as separate from ducts. Fig. 4 explicitly contemplates that a pipe assembly may be either attached or not attached to a duct, and even if it is not attached, it still is a pipe assembly.
| CLAIM TERM #7 | |
|---|---|
| "preassembled / preassembling" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Preassembled" means assembled before beinginstalled as a unit"Preassembling" means assembling beforebeing installed as a unit |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 4 ll. 1-29 (emphasis added).
The term "preassembled / preassembling" appears in independent claims 1, 8, 16, 21, 25, 27, 42 and 44 of the '761 patent and dependent claims 22, 24, 26 and 28-33.
Southland argues that the purpose of the patent is the invention of preassembled ventilation flow control units, methods for the transport of the units and their installation as a unit at the installation site. Independent claims 1, 8, 16 and 44, which each claim a ventilation flow control unit comprising various components, claim that the components are "preassembled to form said ventilation flow control unit, thereby enabling said ventilation flow control unit to be installed in an HVAC system as a single unit." In these claims, the preassembly of the ventilation flow control unit enables the unit to be installed—but this does not require that installation actually occur. Southland's proposed construction thus unduly narrows the claim term and imposes limitations not found in the patent claims. Independent claims 21, 25, 27 and 42 each claim a "method of installing a ventilation flow control unit, comprising: preassembling said flow control unit . . . and installing said preassembled flow control unit." These claims explicitly require installation of the preassembled ventilation flow control unit, rendering Southland's proposed construction redundant.
See Docket No. 31 at 12.
Docket No. 31-2 at col. 7 ll. 15-19, 49-51, col. 8 ll. 28-31, col. 9 ll. 54-56.
Id. at col. 8 ll. 46-53, col. 9 ll. 1-9, 15-25, col. 10. 31-38.
| CLAIM TERM #8 | |
|---|---|
| "positioning / positioning . . . proximate to" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Positioning . . . proximate to" means movingthe bracket from where it was fabricated to anarea close to the transportation surface |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "positioning / positioning . . . proximate to" appears in independent claims 1, 9 and 18 of the '731 patent. Claims 1 and 18 claim a "method of transporting an HVAC pipe assembly, comprising: . . . positioning the bracket proximate to a transporting surface," and claim 9 claims a "method of supporting an HVAC pipe assembly, comprising: . . . positioning the bracket proximate to a transporting surface."
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 5 ll. 5-15, 37-45, col. 6 ll. 27-37.
Southland argues that "proximate" is not a common word and that its proposed construction simply means "a position close to the transporting surface." Southland's proposed construction, however, adds two limitations: moving the bracket "from where it was fabricated" and moving it "to an area close to the transportation surface." Nothing in the claims or specification requires these limitations and Southland does not identify any intrinsic evidence supporting these limitations.
Docket No. 31 at 13.
Id. at 12.
| CLAIM TERM #9 | |
|---|---|
| "transporting surface" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Transporting surface" means any physicalsurface on or by which the unit is moved to theinstallation site |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "transporting surface" appears in independent claims 1, 9 and 18 and dependent claims 8, 17 and 19 of the '731 patent. Claims 1 and 18 claim a "method of transporting an HVAC pipe assembly" and claim 9 claims a "method of supporting an HVAC pipe assembly." Claims 1, 9 and 18 comprise "positioning the bracket proximate to a transporting surface; loading the bracket to the transporting surface" and claims 1 and 18 include a further limitation of "transporting the HVAC pipe assembly by transporting the transporting surface." Claims 8, 17 and 19 each claim the methods according to claims 1, 9 and 18, respectively, "wherein the transporting surface comprises a member selected from the group consisting of a human hand, a forklift, a lifting device, a shipping crate, a box, and a flatbed truck."
Docket No. 31-3 at col. 5 ll. 5-15, 37-45, col. 6 ll. 27-37.
Id.
Id. at col. 5 ll. 33-36, col. 5 ll. 22-26, 38-41.
Southland argues that the construction of "transporting surface" must include the limitation that the HVAC pipe assembly be moved to an installation site. Southland does not identify any intrinsic evidence supporting these limitations. The claimed inventions are methods of transporting and supporting the HVAC pipe assembly, and neither the claims nor the specification restricts to where the HVAC pipe assembly is being transported.
see Docket No. 31 at 13-14.
| CLAIM TERM #10 | |
|---|---|
| "riser" | |
| HVAC Technology's Preferred Construction | Southland's Preferred Construction |
| plain and ordinary meaning | "Riser" means a part of a protective bracketwhich extends up from the edge of the bracket'sbase to protect the pipe(s) |
| CONSTRUCTION | |
| plain and ordinary meaning |
The term "riser" appears in claim 12 of the '761 patent, which claims a ventilation flow control unit comprising a protection bracket, "wherein said protection bracket includes: a base defining an opening to facilitate the passage of a valve stem; a first riser extending from a first edge of said base; and a second riser extending from a second edge of said base opposite said first edge."
Docket No. 31-2 at col. 7 ll. 63-67, col. 8 ll. 1-2.
Southland argues that its proposed construction takes the context of the invention into account and uses plain and ordinary language that the jury can understand. But riser is not a complicated term; it is an ordinary English word. Moreover, the claim itself includes Southland's proposed limitations, by limiting the protection bracket as including "a first riser extending from a first edge" and "a second riser extending from a second edge." In light of the limitations already present in the claim, Southland's proposed construction is unnecessary.
See Docket No. 31 at 14. --------
SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 2, 2016
/s/_________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge