In what is known as a Markman ruling, Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender determined claim constructions favorable to NVIDIA will be applied to six out of seven disputed claims when the case goes to a full hearing in late June NVIDIA's David Shannon says the firm is very pleased with the outcome of the ruling and believes it further strengthens the patents NVIDIA has asserted.
In this patent case, NVIDIA alleges Samsung and Qualcomm infringe on seven graphics patents. The firm claims all Samsung Galaxy phones and tablets containing Qualcomm Adreno, ARM Mali and Imagination PowerVR chips violate its patents. It's unclear why NVIDIA goes specifically after Samsung and Qualcomm, ARM and Imagination are not named as defendants in this patent case.
The judge presiding over our patent case against Samsung and Qualcomm in the U.S. International Trade Commission has returned a pretrial claim construction ruling that favors NVIDIA’s preferred construction on nearly all of the claims that were disputed.
This pretrial decision, known as a Markman ruling, is the judge’s determination of the meaning and scope of the patent claims. Markman hearings are used in patent cases to define disputed terms of patents before a case goes to trial. This is an important step in determining whether Samsung and Qualcomm infringe NVIDIA’s asserted patents.
Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender has now determined what the claim language will mean for the hearing and his ultimate decision on the merits of the case.
We’re very pleased with the outcome of the ruling, in which claim constructions favorable to NVIDIA will be applied to six out of seven disputed claims when the judge considers the question of Samsung’s and Qualcomm’s infringement. This further strengthens the patents we have asserted, and we look forward to a full hearing in late June.
As I explained in September when we announced this action, this is the first time in NVIDIA’s 22-year history that we have initiated a patent suit. Our 7,000 issued and pending patents include inventions vital to modern computing. We have chosen seven of those patents to assert in the ITC case.f