IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL INC., 

AND EMC CORPORATION,

 Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00473-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00474-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00475-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00476-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00477-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00478-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00479-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00482-ADA

PATENT CASE

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL INC., 

EMC CORPORATION, AND VMWARE, 

INC.,

 Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00480-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00481-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00485-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00486-ADA

PATENT CASE

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Pursuant to the scheduling orders in these cases, the Parties jointly submit this claim 

construction statement. 
2

I. GROUP 1: -480, -481, -485, AND -486 CASES 

A. -480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133

-480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“whether a congestion 

condition exists [on/for] the 

egress node” (Claims 1, 12, 

and 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “whether the egress node is 

currently congested”

-480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“processing the packets” 

(Claims 1, 12, and 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “modifying, at the ingress 

node, the queuing priority of 

packets destined for the egress 

node”

-480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“such that packets associated 

with egress nodes for which 

the congestion condition does 

not exist have a different 

queuing priority within the 

load balancing network than 

packets associated with 

egress nodes for which the 

congestion condition exists” 

(Claims 1, 12, and 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “such that packets are marked 

depending on whether they are 

destined for a congested 

egress node, such that marked 

packets have a different 

probability of being dropped”

-480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133 (Agreed Function; Disputed Structure)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“means for determining, for 

each packet, whether a 

congestion condition exists 

on the egress node” (Claim 

12) (Claims 1, 12, and 13)

(Proposed by both Parties)

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: determining, for 

each packet, whether a 

congestion condition exists on 

the egress node

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: determining, for 

each packet, whether a 

congestion condition exists on 

the egress node

Structure: Indefinite
3

Structure: processor 210 

performing operations at ’133 

patent, 5:11-20

-480 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,539,133 (Agreed Function; Disputed Structure)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“means for processing the 

packets such that packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition does not exist have 

a different queuing priority 

within the load-balancing 

network than packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition exists” (Claim 12)

(Proposed by both Parties)

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6.

Function: processing the 

packets such that packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition does not exist have 

a different queuing priority 

within the load-balancing 

network than packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition exists

Structure: processor 210 

which marks packets in a 

manner that differentiates 

queuing priority based on 

whether the packets are 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition exists

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6.

Function: processing the 

packets such that packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition does not exist have 

a different queuing priority 

within the load-balancing 

network than packets 

associated with egress nodes 

for which the congestion 

condition exists

Structure: processor 210 

which marks the packets such 

that marked packets have a

different probability of being 

dropped than unmarked 

packets

B. -481 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,164,800

-481 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,164,800 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“latency cost” (Claims 1, 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “communication delay 

between a compute node and a 

data node”

-481 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,164,800 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“[determining/determine] an 

assignment objective” 

(Claims 1, 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “select[ing] one of a plurality 

of assignment objectives”
4

C. -485 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,636,309

-485 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,636,309 (Agreed)

Claim Term/Phrase Agreed Construction

“split ratio vector” (Claims 1, 

11, and 16)

(Proposed by Defendants)

“the proportion of the flow routed in each path”

D. -486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“said element comprises: an 

element for recording whether 

a queue is empty or occupied, 

an element for recording the 

[number of data cells/quantity 

of data] contained in a queue, 

an element identifying a queue 

from which data is to be 

output, and an element 

identifying a group of queues 

from which data is to be 

output” (Claims 1 and 26)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “said element includes all of: 

an element for recording 

whether a queue is empty or 

occupied, an element for 

recording the quantity of data 

contained in a queue, an 

element identifying a queue 

from which data is to be 

output, and an element 

identifying a group of queues 

from which data is to be 

output”

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“expected state for said 

element”; “predetermined 

state for said element”; 

“expected value of said 

parameter”; “expected states 

for that element”; “expected 

status for said element”; 

“expected state of said first 

element” (Claims 1, 3, 12, 13, 

18, 21, 24, 26, 28, 29, 48, and 

49)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “a [state/value] for the 

[element/parameter] that 

would be expected if the 

scheduler is functioning 

properly”
5

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“computer generated model” 

(Claims 1, 18, 21, 26, 44, and 

45)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “a simulated computer model 

of circuitry describing a 

scheduler”

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Agreed Function; Disputed Structure)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“detection means for detecting 

a state of an element” (Claims 

1 and 18)1

(Proposed by Defendants)

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: detecting a state of 

an element

Structure: module 110, 112, 

114, 115, 118, 120, 122, 124, 

126, 128, or 130

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: detecting a state of 

an element

Structure: modules 110, 112, 

114 . . . to 130 using a 

programming language 

interface (PLI) as described in 

’360 patent, 12:11–41

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Agreed Function; Disputed Structure)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“comparing means for 

comparing the detected state 

with a predetermined state for 

said element and for 

outputting the result of the 

comparison” (Claim 1)2

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: comparing the 

detected state with a 

predetermined state for said 

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: comparing the 

detected state with a 

predetermined state for said 

1

 Defendants briefed this term as representative of the following terms that are materially the 

same: “means for requesting said scheduler model to pass the status of said element to said 

monitor” (claim 1); “monitoring means for monitoring a parameter relating to the operation of said 

scheduler” (claim 3); and “means for detecting the state of at least one element of said scheduler 

whose state depends on which queue is selected by said scheduler for outputting a test cell” (claim 

24). E.g., No. 6:20-cv-00480, D.I. 82 at 8 n.5. WSOU never disputed in either of its briefs the 

representativeness of the term. Id., D.I. 80 at 6–8; Id., D.I. 83 at 5–6.

2

 Defendants briefed this term as representative of claim 24, which recites materially the same 

limitation as claim 1: “a monitor having . . . comparison means for at least one of: comparing the 

detected element status with an expected status for said element based on the detected queue 

identity and comparing the detected queue identity with an expected queue identity based on the 

detected status of said element.” Defendants likewise briefed this term as representative of the 

following: “comparison means for comparing the detected parameter with said expected 
6

(Proposed by Defendants)

element and for outputting the 

result of the comparison

Structure: rule checker 132

element and for outputting the 

result of the comparison

Structure: Indefinite

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Agreed Function; Disputed Structure)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“determining means for 

determining an expected value 

of said parameter” (Claim 18)

(Proposed by Defendants)

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: determining an 

expected value of said 

parameter

Structure: operation(s) 

which apply one or more rules 

interrelating “the detected” 

state and the “expected 

value,” as explained, for 

example, at 6:34-37, 6:45-58, 

and 9:12-11:60

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: determining an 

expected value of said 

parameter

Structure: Indefinite

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“element for recording 

whether a queue is empty or 

occupied” (claims 1, 5, 6, 7–9, 

14–15, 20, 25, 26, 30, 33–35, 

and 38)

(Proposed by Defendants)

No construction required apart 

from finding this term is not 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6. Alternatively, if deemed 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6, then, 

Function: recording whether 

a queue is empty or occupied. 

Structure: data storage 

within a scheduler, such as, 

for example, queue status 

register 165, 167, 201, or 203

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: recording whether 

a queue is empty or occupied

Structure: queue status 

register 165, 167, 201, or 203

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

parameter and for outputting the result of the comparison” (claim 18); and “means for detecting 

the state of an element of said scheduler at a plurality of different times and comparing the detected 

states with expected states and outputting the result of said comparison” (claim 21). E.g., No. 

6:20-cv-00480, D.I. 82 at 12 n.9. WSOU never disputed in either of its briefs the 

representativeness of the term. Id., D.I. 80, 8–10; Id., D.I. 83 at 6–7.
7

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“an element for recording the 

[number of [data] 

cells/quantity of data] 

contained in a queue” (claims 

1, 9, 20, 26, 30, and 383)

4

(Proposed by Defendants)

No construction required apart 

from finding this term is not 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6. Alternatively, if deemed 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6, then, 

Function: recording the 

[quantity of data / number of 

cells / number of data cells] 

contained in a queue; 

Structure: data storage 

within a scheduler, such as, 

for example, counter 169, 205, 

or 207

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function: recording the 

[quantity of data/number of 

data cells] contained in a 

queue

Structure: counter 169, 205, 

or 207

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“an element identifying a 

queue from which data is to be 

output” (claims 1 and 265)

6

No construction required apart 

from finding this term is not 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6. Alternatively, if deemed 

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

3

 Defendants briefed this term as representative for claims 1, 5, 6, 7–9, 14–15, 20, 25, 26, 30, 33–

35, and 38. E.g., No. 6:20-cv-00480, D.I. 82 at 17; Id., D.I. 86 at 9. WSOU never disputed in 

either of its briefs that each claim recites materially the same term, but requested that claims 5–6, 

1415, and 33–35 be deleted from this Joint Claim Construction Statement. Id., D.I. 80 at 14; Id., 

D.I. 83 at 10–11. WSOU argues for the first time that Defendants “improperly conflate these 

expressly distinct terms into one,” but offers no explanation at all.

4As explained in WSOU’s opening brief, and reiterated in its reply brief, WSOU objects to the 

inclusion of these additional and distinct terms because Dell offers these additional terms for 

construction in excess of the Court’s Order limiting the total number of disputed terms to no more 

than thirty-six across all cases. Br. 13, 15; Reply at 10. WSOU further objects to Dell’s attempt 

to improperly conflate these expressly distinct terms into one. Id.

5

 Defendants briefed this term as representative for claims 1, 26, 5, 20, and 30. E.g., No. 6:20-cv00480, D.I. 82 at 18; Id., D.I. 86 at 9. WSOU never disputed in either of its briefs that each claim 

recites materially the same term, but requested that claims 5, 20, and 30 be deleted from this Joint 

Claim Construction Statement. Id., D.I. 80 at 15; Id., D.I. 83 at 11. WSOU argues for the first 

time that Defendants “improperly conflate these expressly distinct terms into one,” but offers no 

explanation at all.

6 WSOU raises the same objections for these terms, which Dell neglected to separately count 

against the total limit, as set forth in note 1, supra.
8

(Proposed by Defendants) subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6, then, 

Function: identifying a queue 

from which data is to be 

output 

Structure: data storage 

within a scheduler, such as, 

for example, pointer 177, 179, 

181, 183, 209, 211, 213, or 

215

Function: identifying a 

queue from which data is to 

be output

Structure: pointer 177, 179, 

181, 183, 209, 211, 213, or 

215

-486 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,092,360 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“an element indicating a 

group of queues from which 

data is to be output” (claims 

1267)

8

(Proposed by Defendants)

No construction required apart 

from finding this term is not 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6. Alternatively, if deemed 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6, then, 

Function: identifying a queue 

from which data is to be 

output 

Structure: priority selector 

173 or 208

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6

Function:

[identifying/indicating] a 

group of queues, from which 

data is to be output

Structure: Indefinite

7

 Defendants briefed the term “an element [identifying/indicating] a group of queues from which 

data is to be output” as representative for claims 1, 5, 9, 14–15, 20, 26, 30, 33, 35, and 38. E.g., 

No. 6:20-cv-00480, D.I. 82 at 19; Id., D.I. 86 at 10. WSOU never disputed in either of its briefs 

that each claim recites materially the same term, but requested that claims 5, 9, 14–15, 20, 30, 33, 

35, and 38 be deleted from this Joint Claim Construction Statement. Id., D.I. 80 at 15–16; Id., D.I. 

83 at 11–13. WSOU argues for the first time that Defendants “improperly conflate these expressly 

distinct terms into one,” but offers no explanation at all.

8 WSOU raises the same objections for these terms, which Dell neglected to separately count 

against the total limit, as set forth in note 1, supra. WSOU further objects to Dell’s belated 

argument, raised for the first time in its reply brief, that the scope of the dispute should also 

encompass distinct phrases of other claims which do not recite “an element identifying.” 
9

II. GROUP 2: -473 AND -478 CASES

A. -473 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,137,144

-473 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,137,144 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“group of communication 

traffic” (claims 1, 4, 11, 12, 

14)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “traffic in a VLAN or other 

identifiable communications 

group”

-473 Case, U.S. Patent No. 9,137,144 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“V is a group identifier 

corresponding to the group of 

communication traffic”

(claims 1, 11, 14)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Plain and ordinary meaning; 

but the group identifier cannot 

be a hash value based on 

packet fields such as source 

address and destination 

address

B. -478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“fast propagation” (claims 1, 

9, & 17)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite 

In the alternative this means 

“much faster than using the 

computing means, e.g. by 

using OSPF routing protocol”

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“data plane means for 

forwarding packets between 

the nodes” (claim 1) / “data 

plane means for forwarding 

packets to other nodes in the 

network” (claims 9 & 17)

(Proposed by both Parties)

Subject to means-plus-function 

construction.

Claim 1

Function: forwarding packets 

between the nodes

Structure: 4:44-60 (link 

interface 216 and switching 

fabric 214); and equivalent 

structures

Claim 9 & 17

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6.

Claim 1

Function: forwarding packets 

between the nodes

Structure: Data plane 202 

(distinct from the computing 

means) including switching 

fabric 214 and link interface 

216; and equivalent

structures
10

Function: forwarding packets 

to other nodes in the network

Structure: 4:44-60 (link 

interface 216 and switching 

fabric 214); and equivalent 

structures

Claim 9 & 17

Function: forwarding packets 

to other nodes in the network

Structure: Data plane 202 

(distinct from the computing 

means) including switching 

fabric 214 and link interface 

216; and equivalent structures

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Agreed)

Claim Term/Phrase Agreed Construction

“computing means for control 

of the nodes” (Claim 1)

“computing means for 

controlling the node” (Claims 

9 & 17)

(Proposed by both Parties)

Subject to means-plus-function construction. 

Function (Claim 1): control of the nodes

Function (Claims 9 & 17): controlling the node

Structure (Claims 1, 9, & 17): CPU 206; and equivalent 

structures

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Agreed)

Claim Term/Phrase Agreed Construction

“means for fast propagation 

of node related information 

between the data plane means 

in each node and forwarding 

the information to the 

computing means in the 

network” (Claim 1) 

“means for fast propagation 

of node related information to 

and from the data plane 

means in other nodes in the 

network and forwarding the 

information to the computing 

means” (Claims 9 & 17)

(Proposed by both Parties)

Subject to means-plus-function construction. 

Function (Claim 1): fast propagation of node related 

information between the data plane means in each node and 

forwarding the information to the computing means in the 

network 

Function (Claims 9 & 17): fast propagation of node related 

information to and from the data plane means in other nodes in 

the network and forwarding the information to the computing 

means 

Structure (Claims 1, 9, & 17): 3:19-52 (switching fabric 214 

and link interface 216; wherein the link interface comprises a 

fast link state processor (FSLP) 218 and a link failure database 

(LFDB) structure 228), 4:1-4, 7:18-20 (forwarding to CPU over 

link 236); and equivalent structures

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Agreed)

Claim Term/Phrase Agreed Construction

“means for fast propagation 

of link state information”

Subject to means-plus-function construction.
11

(Claims 1, 9 & 17)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Function: fast propagation of link state information

Structure: 7:60-8:3 (Fast Link State Processor (FLSP) 218, 

Fabric Interface 226 and Switch Fabric 214 structure), 8:21-27; 

and equivalent structures

-478 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,126,921 (Agreed)

Claim Term/Phrase Agreed Construction

“the data, plane means” 

(Claim 9)

(Proposed by Plaintiff)

“the data plane means”

III. GROUP 3: -477 AND -482 CASES

A. -477 Case, U.S. Patent No. 8,913,489 

-477 Case, U.S. Patent No. 8,913,489 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“the first set of port interfaces 

of the multi-chassis link 

aggregate” (claims 1, 8, 15)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

B. -482 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,424,020

-482 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,424,020 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“removing, at the network 

node, the protocol data of a 

portion of protocol layers 

from the received data 

stream” (claim 1) / “removes 

protocol data from a portion 

of protocol layers from a data 

stream” (claim 6)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

-482 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,424,020 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“a control unit which 

removes protocol data from a 

portion of protocol layers 

from a data stream received 

from the communication 

Plain and ordinary meaning; 

not indefinite under IPXL

Indefinite. 

In the alternative: this term is 

subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 

6.
12

network via the second 

interface, the data stream 

comprising useful data and 

the protocol data, and 

switches a remaining data 

stream to be transmitted to 

one of the terminals via the 

first interface” (claim 6)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Function: [1] removes 

protocol data from a portion 

of protocol layers from a data 

stream received from the 

communication network via 

the second interface, the data 

stream comprising useful data 

and the protocol data, and [2] 

switches a remaining data 

stream to be transmitted to 

one of the terminals via the 

first interface

Structure: control unit 

CONTR executing function 

PHN, containing processes P1 

to P3 and function SW; and 

equivalent structures

-482 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,424,020 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“bus system” (claims 1 and 6)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “a network that does not 

include any active 

components such as switching 

nodes, gateways, routers, or 

bridges, wherein all nodes are 

connected to a single wire”

IV. GROUP 4: -474, 475, -476, AND -479 CASES

A. -474 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,212,536 

-474 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,212,536 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“bridge” (claims 1, 12)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “a network interface device 

that operates no higher than 

the data link layer”

-474 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,212,536 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“channel in a connection 

based network” (claims 1, 12)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “one of the paths that has been 

established in a network for 

communications”
13

-474 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,212,536 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“forwarding system 

configured to read a priority 

of a data frame to be 

forwarded onto the 

connection-based network by 

way of the first one of the 

ports, identify a service 

interface which the map 

indicates corresponds to the 

read user priority and forward 

the data frame over the 

channel in the connectionbased network associated 

with the identified service 

interface” (claim 1)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6. 

Function: read a priority of a 

data frame to be forwarded 

onto the connection-based 

network by way of the first 

one of the ports, identify a 

service interface which the 

map indicates corresponds to 

the read user priority and 

forward the data frame over 

the channel in the connectionbased network associated with 

the identified service interface 

Structure: Indefinite

-474 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,212,536 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“means for reading priorities 

of data frames directed by the 

bridge to at least a first one of 

the bridge ports” (claim 12)

(Proposed by both Parties)

Subject to means-plusfunction construction. 

Function: reading priorities 

of data frames directed by the 

bridge to at least a first one of 

the bridge ports 

Structure: bridge, with 

bridging system and bridge 

port, and equivalents thereof

Algorithm (if required): see 

e.g., 4:26-37, 5:40-55, 6:4-14, 

6:15-42, 7:23-44, 8:21-28, 

Figs. 1, 2, 4, 5A-I, 6, and 

equivalents thereof.

This term is subject to 35 

U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 6. 

Function: reading priorities 

of data frames directed by the 

bridge to at least a first one of

the bridge ports

Structure: Indefinite

B. -475 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,453,888

-475 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,453,888 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction
14

“stackable trunk port” 

(Claims 1, 8, 9, 10, 11–13, 

15, 19, 20)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “trunk port supporting the 

Riverstone solution (i.e. the 

additional extension 802.1Q 

packet header)”

-475 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,453,888 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“backbone VLAN trunk” 

(Claims 1, 5–7, 12, 15–20)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “data transport trunk links 

defined between stackable 

trunk ports on core routers”

-475 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,453,888 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“wherein the selection and 

association of at least one 

backbone VLAN ID with 

each one of the corresponding 

plurality of backbone VLAN 

trunks is undertaken 

irrespective of one of an inuse and a stand-by 

designation of each one of the 

plurality of backbone VLAN 

trunks and each one of the 

plurality of stackable trunk 

ports” (claim 1) / “wherein 

the association of the 

plurality of backbone VLAN 

IDs with the backbone VLAN 

trunk is undertaken 

irrespective of one of an inuse and a stand-by 

designation of the backbone 

VLAN trunk and the at least 

one stackable trunk port” 

(claim 15)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning “wherein the provisioning 

method ignores the 

designation of a backbone 

VLAN trunk as in-use or 

stand-by when associating the 

backbone VLAN ID with the 

backbone VLAN trunks (as 

opposed to, during association 

of VLANs with trunks, 

explicitly designating 

physical VLANs associated 

with a logical VLAN as in-use 

and explicitly designating 

other physical VLANs 

associated with the logical 

VLAN as back-up)”

C. -476 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,565,435 

-476 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,565,435 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction
15

“setting the IPPC of one of 

the ports of one of said 

bridges within the MSTI to a 

lower IPPC when said port is 

part of the VLAN member 

set” (claims 1, 8, 13)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning order of steps

The setting of the IPPC to a 

lower IPPC must occur after 

the creation and configuration 

of the Multiple Spanning Tree 

Instances step and after the 

creation of the VLAN member 

sets step

-476 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,565,435 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“ideally” (claims 7, 11, 18)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

-476 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,565,435 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“processing unit for setting 

the Internal Port Path Cost 

(IPPC) of one of the ports of 

one of said bridges within the 

MSTI to a high IPPC when 

said port is not part of the 

VLAN member set” (claim 8) 

/ “processing unit for setting 

the IPPC of one of the ports 

of one of said bridges within 

the MSTI to a lower IPPC 

when said port is part of the 

VLAN member set” (claim 8)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning This is subject to 35 U.S.C. § 

112, ¶ 6.

Function: setting the Internal 

Port Path Cost (IPPC) of one 

of the ports of one of said 

bridges within the MSTI [to a 

high IPPC when said port is 

not part of the VLAN 

member set / to a lower IPPC 

when said port is part of the 

VLAN member set]

Structure: Indefinite

-476 Case, U.S. Patent No. 7,565,435 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

Entirety of claims 9–11 and 

13–18

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Indefinite

D. -479 Case, U.S. Patent No. 8,402,129

-479 Case, U.S. Patent No. 8,402,129 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction
16

“rate of change” (claim 3)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Plain and ordinary meaning; 

not an instantaneous value 

measured at a fixed point in 

time

-479 Case, U.S. Patent No. 8,402,129 (Disputed)

Claim Term/Phrase Plaintiff’s Construction Defendants’ Construction

“initiating a poll of resources 

in the nodes of the network 

by the management station in 

response to reporting from 

the node or a time interval 

being exceeded” (claim 3)

(Proposed by Defendants)

Plain and ordinary meaning Both of these events trigger a 

poll9

Dated: April 19, 2021

9 As stated in Defendants’ briefing, Defendants are amenable to replacing “trigger” with “initiate.” 

D.I. 85 at 38 n.25. In addition, Defendants would be satisfied with a construction that 

“management station” means “a management station that is capable of initiating a poll in response 

to both reporting from the node and a time interval being exceeded.” D.I. 90 at 19 n.16.
17

By: /s/ Mark D. Siegmund

James L. Etheridge

James L. Etheridge

Texas State Bar No. 24059147

Ryan S. Loveless

Texas State Bar No. 24036997

Travis L. Richins

Texas State Bar No. 24061296

ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP, PLLC

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324

Southlake, Texas 76092

Telephone: (817) 470-7249

Facsimile: (817) 887-5950

Jim@EtheridgeLaw.com

Ryan@EtheridgeLaw.com

Travis@EtheridgeLaw.com

Mark D. Siegmund

State Bar No. 24117055

mark@waltfairpllc.com

Law Firm of Walt, Fair PLLC.

1508 North Valley Mills Drive

Waco, Texas 76710

Telephone: (254) 772-6400

Facsimile: (254) 772-6432

Attorneys for Plaintiff

By: /s/ Jaysen S. Chung

Barry K. Shelton

Texas State Bar No. 24055029

bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com

SHELTON COBURN LLP

311 RR 620, Suite 205

Austin, TX 78734-4775 

Telephone: 512.263.2165

Facsimile: 512.263.2166 

Benjamin Hershkowitz

bhershkowitz@gibsondunn.com

Brian A. Rosenthal

brosenthal@gibsondunn.com 

Allen Kathir

akathir@gibsondunn.com

Kyanna Sabanoglu

ksabanoglu@gibsondunn.com

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

200 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10166-0193 

Telephone: 212.351.4000

Facsimile: 212.351.4035 

Y. Ernest Hsin

ehsin@gibsondunn.com

Jaysen S. Chung

jschung@gibsondunn.com

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

555 Mission Street, Suite 3000

San Francisco, CA 94105-0921

Telephone: 415.393.8200

Facsimile: 415.393.8306

Ryan K. Iwahashi

riwahashi@gibsondunn.com

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

1881 Page Mill Road

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211

Telephone: 650.849.5300

Facsimile: 650.849.5333

Attorneys for Defendants
18

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on April 19, 2021, all counsel of record who are deemed to 

have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document through the 

Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(b)(1). 

/s/ Mark D. Siegmund

Mark D. Siegmund