from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas in No. 6:16-cv-01003-RWS-JDL, Judge Robert
Daniel Blackburn, Susman Godfrey LLP, Houston, TX, argued for
plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Parker C. Folse,
III, Ian B. Crosby, Seattle, WA; Eric J. Enger, Alden Harris,
Leslie Payne, Heim, Payne & Chorush, LLP, Houston, TX.
Michael Hawes, Baker Botts, LLP, Houston, TX, argued for
defendants-appellees. Also represented by Douglas M. Kubehl,
Bethany Rose Ford, Jeffery Scott Becker, Dallas, TX.
Defendant-appellee AT&T Mobility, LLC also represented by
Bryant C. Boren, Jr., Palo Alto, CA.
Prost, Chief Judge, Reyna and Taranto, Circuit Judges.
Networks, Inc. sued AT&T Mobility, LLC and Ericsson Inc.
in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8, 036, 119. Following
claim construction, the parties jointly stipulated to
noninfringement, and the district court entered judgment in
favor of AT&T Mobility, LLC and Ericsson Inc. Iridescent
Networks, Inc. appeals on the ground that the district court
erred in its construction of the term "high quality of
service connection." Because the district court
correctly construed this term, we affirm.
Networks, Inc. ("Iridescent") is the assignee of
U.S. Patent No. 8, 036, 119 ("the '119
patent"), entitled "System and Method of Providing
Bandwidth on Demand." The '119 patent is directed to
a system and method of network communication that provides
guaranteed bandwidth on demand for applications that require
high bandwidth and minimizes data delay and loss during
transmission. '119 patent col. 1 ll. 19-22, 58-60,
col. 3 ll. 46-48, col. 6 ll. 21-23.
'119 patent discloses that prior art networks transmit
data packets in an ad hoc manner, with each packet taking an
unpredictable route to its destination. Id. col. 1
ll. 35-45. This is undesirable because some applications
delivered on broadband "are very sensitive to any delay
and . . . any variance in the delay" of packet
transmission. Id. col. 1 l. 66-col. 2 l. 2. The
'119 patent teaches that some applications "are also
sensitive to any packets . . . which may be lost in the
transmission (0.0001% packet loss is the preferred quality
for video transmission)." Id. col. 2 ll. 2- 5.
The '119 patent also teaches that some applications
require significantly more bandwidth than others to provide
tolerable levels of quality. Id. col. 1 ll. 58-60,
col. 3 ll. 31- 45. The '119 patent describes video
applications as examples of such applications and explains
that prior art "video compression methods vary greatly
in the bandwidth they require to transport the video in
real-time-some solutions are as low as 64 kbps up to 300
Mbps." Id. col. 3 ll. 31-45. Figure 3 of the
'119 patent illustrates bandwidth, packet loss, and
latency requirements of several applications, including
different video applications:
with these parameter-sensitive applications, the '119
patent discloses a system and method for managing network
traffic routes and bandwidth availability to minimize adverse
network conditions and to assure that the network connection
maintains a requested minimum level of one of these three
parameters. Id. col. 5 l. 64-col. 6 l. 3. Rather
than using existing ad hoc network routes, the invention
creates custom routes to maximize the availability of the
required bandwidth, minimize packet loss, and reduce latency.
Id. col. 5 ll. 64-67; id. col. 6 ll. 57-61.
According to the '119 patent, this results in a
"high quality" network connection with bandwidth
"on demand." Id. col. 5 ll. 23-29.
Applications that do not have minimum network connection
parameter requirements may be routed through existing
"best-effort" ad hoc network connections using
"existing network components." Id. col. 5
ll. 14-20. Claim 1 is illustrative and recites:
method for providing bandwidth on demand comprising:
receiving, by a controller positioned in a network, a request
for a high quality of service connection supporting
any one of a plurality of one-way and two-way traffic types
between an originating end-point and a terminating end-point,
wherein the request comes from the originating end-point and
includes at least one of a requested amount of bandwidth and
determining, by the controller, whether the originating
end-point is authorized to use the requested amount of
bandwidth or the codec and whether the terminating end-point
can be reached by the controller; directing, by the
controller, a portal that is positioned in the network and
physically separate from the ...