Legal Opinion

Broadcom Corporation v. Netflix, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided May 23, 2022No. 3:20-cv-04677Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BROADCOM CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-04677-JD 8 Plaintiffs, CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ORDER v. 9 10 NETFLIX INC, Defendant. 11 12 13 The parties in this patent infringement action have asked the Court to construe eight 14 phrases in certain claims of the

U.S. Patent No. 8,259,121

(the ’121 patent),

U.S. Patent No. 15

6,744,387 (the ’387 patent),

U.S. Patent No. 6,982,663

(the ’663 patent), and

U.S. Patent No. 16

9,332,283 (the ’283 patent). In addition to the usual construction issues, the parties raised 17 indefiniteness…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
  3. Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  4. Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
  5. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API