United States District Court, D. Delaware
ORDER CONSTRUING THE TERMS OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8, 661,
considering the submissions of the parties and hearing oral
argument on the matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and
DECREED that, as used in the asserted claims of U.S. Patent
No. 8, 661, 094 ("the '094 patent"):
term "translator input window" in
the '094 patent is construed to mean "an input
window that is separate from the browser
term "browser window" is construed
to be the plain and ordinary meaning of the term.
term "overlaid on a portion of the browser
window" is construed to be the plain meaning of
term "translator entity" is
construed to mean "an entity that performs the functions
for the 'translator entity' as set forth in the
term "URL address for a webpage which is most
likely to be a desired webpage associated with the input text
string information received rom the user" is
construed to mean "URL address associated with the input
non-URL text string information, the URL address being for a
webpage most likely to be desired webpage."
term "statistical data of web pages in web
search results for said information" is
construed to be the plain meaning of the term.
term "an input of a non-URL text string/the
input text string information" is construed to
mean "the text [that is not a URL-address text string]
typed in by the user."
term "without any additional user intervention
beyond the entry of said input text string
information" is construed to mean "without
requiring the user to take an additional intervening
action beyond what would have been required to enter the text
string which has been input by the user."
term "domain name server" will not
be construed by the court at this time."
All docket citations refer to
Civil Action NO. 16-470-GMS. The abbreviation "Tr."
refers to the transcript from the Markman Hearing on
October 11, 2017, D.I. 91.
The parties' dispute centers
on: (1) whether the translator input window is separate from
the browser window; and (2) whether the term
"window" should be defined for the jury.
Markman Hr'g Tr. 32:15-18. The court finds that
the disputed term should be construed as "an input
window that is separate from the browser window" because
that construction comports with both the description of the