• ALJ Gildea Denies Motion to Preclude Claim Construction Arguments in Certain Mobile Electronic Devices Incorporating Haptics (337-TA-834)
  • January 5, 2013 | Authors: Eric W. Schweibenz; Thomas C. Yebernetsky
  • Law Firm: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office
  • On December 13, 2012, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 22 (dated December 3, 2012) denying Respondents’ motion to preclude Complainant Immersion Corporation (“Immersion”) from offering proposed constructions of certain claim terms in Certain Mobile Electronic Devices Incorporating Haptics (Inv. No. 337-TA-834).

    According to the Order, Respondents argued that Immersion waited until the eleventh hour before offering construction of several claim terms. Respondents asserted that this late submission allowed Immersion to “avoid a fair and simultaneous exchange of proposed claim constructions.”

    In opposition, Immersion argued that it acted in good faith throughout the process of submitting claim construction positions. Specifically, Immersion asserted that the late submissions were not objectionable because they were merely assertions of the plain and ordinary meaning of the claim terms, not new constructions.

    ALJ Gildea determined that Immersion acted reasonable throughout the claim construction process and, more importantly, Respondents did not show any prejudice. ALJ Gildea held that Respondents were not prejudiced by the allegedly objectionable positions taken by Immersion because they occurred early in the Investigation (approximately two months before the close of discovery). Accordingly, ALJ Gildea denied Respondents’ motion.