Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00244/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00244-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HOLZ LTD.

Plaintiff(s),

v.

ROBERT JAMES KASHA, et al.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C05-0244 BZ

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ORDER

At the request of the parties (Joint Claim Construction

and Prehearing Statement [docket document # 34]), the Court

construes the following claims:

Claim Terminology Relating to

U.S. Patent No. 4,742,573

Constructions

“adhesively secured” secured by adhesive

“affixing” attaching

“aperture” hole or opening

“clamp” a device that tightly or

firmly holds or presses parts

together (including, for

example, holding the clamp to

the sheet or multiple pieces

of the clamp to one another)

Case 3:05-cv-00244-BZ Document 69 Filed 01/18/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Claim Terminology Relating to

U.S. Patent No. 4,742,573

Constructions

“closed peripherally” closed around the periphery

of

“drumhead” head of a drum

“comprises a peripheral frame

member”

includes a supporting part

around the periphery (of the

hole or opening)

“marginally of” at the edge of

“sheet” a broad, thin, mass or piece

of material that need not be

flat 

“substantially rigid relative

to said sheet”

more rigid than the sheet

“tensioning ring” a ring that tensions

Regarding the claim “substantially reestablishing the

integrity”, for the reasons discussed at the January 18, 2006,

the Court chooses not to construe such claim because the

ordinary and customary meaning of the terms is sufficiently

clear to a person of skill in the art. See Phillips v. AWH

Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2005)(“In some cases,

the ordinary meaning of claim language as understood by a

person of skill in the art may be readily apparent even to lay

judges, and claim construction in such cases involves little

more than the application of the widely accepted meaning of

commonly understood words.”) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 18, 2006

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\HOLZ\CLAIMS.CON.ORDER.wpd

Case 3:05-cv-00244-BZ Document 69 Filed 01/18/06 Page 2 of 2