Legal Opinion
Network Commerce, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided September 8, 2005No. 2004-1445PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DYK, Circuit Judge.
Network Commerce, Inc. and CRS, LLC appeal from the judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Washington holding that Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) did not infringe any claim of United States Patent No. 6,073,-124 (the “ ’124 patent”) either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Network Commerce, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 260 F.Supp.2d 1042 (W.D.Wash.2003) (“Network II”). We hold that the district court was substantially correct in its construction of the term “download component” and affirm its judgment of non-infringement. We also conclude…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Texas Instruments Incorporated v. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, Lsi Logic Corporation, and Vlsi Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Pc Connector Solutions LLC v. Smartdisk Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Jack Guttman, Inc. v. Kopykake Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Aquatex Industries v. Techniche Solutions [Reposted With Cover Sheet]Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Microsoft Corporation v. Biscotti, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2008
- Mich & Mich TGR, Inc. v. BrazabraDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2015
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.