Opinion ID: 209950
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: one or more scheduled transmission times

Text: The claims also require the infringer to assign one or more scheduled transmission times. This limitation comes from the scheduling step, the third step in claim 16. This step recites: scheduling transmission of selected portions of said information database, including assigning each selected portion of said information database one or more scheduled transmission times; '505 patent, col.21 ll.44-47. DirecTV alleges that the district court interpreted selected portions of [the] information database as each part of the information database selected for transmission. To the contrary, the district court construed dividing said selected portions of said information database into a prioritized set of tiers, wherein all the selected portions of said information database in each tier are transmitted at a corresponding repetition rate to mean placing each part of the information database selected for transmission into one or more groups of information, and transmitting each group at a chosen repetition rate. Markman Order, 416 F.Supp.2d at 520. Relying on its interpretation of the district court's construction of each in the dividing step to inform the use of each in the scheduling step, or alternately on the plain meaning of each, DirecTV argues that Finisar had to prove that the selected portions of DirecTV's database it identified are each assigned a scheduled transmission time. The record shows that only 3% of DirecTV's programming (i.e. its data selected for transmission) comprises playback programming that fits within this meaning of scheduled. The other 97% is turnaround programming, received from third-party content providers like CNN, ESPN, and others. DirecTV argues, inter alia, that it does not infringe because these third parties schedule the programming, independently of DirecTV. Nonetheless, even under DirecTV's interpretation of the district court's construction, claim 16 does not require scheduling for all transmitted information. Rather the claim specifies scheduling for each part of the information database selected for transmission. Thus the claim leaves room for transmission of other data in other, i.e. non-scheduled, ways because claim 16 is written using an open-ended format, using the transitional term comprising. Claim 16 simply does not require scheduling for all transmissions from the information database, but only for some, i.e. selected, portions. Because both parties agree that DirecTV assigns scheduled transmission times to its playback programming, comprising about 3% of its content, the jury had substantial evidence to conclude that DirecTV's accused system meets the scheduling step of the asserted claims.