Opinion ID: 211813
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: distributed computer system

Text: 53 The district court construed distributed computer system to require that there be a stand alone computer in each processor system. SeaChange, 313 F.Supp.2d at 398. The phrase distributed computer system appears in the preamble of method claim 37. Thus, a preliminary question exists as to whether distributed computer system is a claim limitation. See Catalina Mktg. Int'l v. Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 801, 807-08 (Fed. Cir.2002). In general, a preamble limits the invention if it recites essential structure or steps, or if it is `necessary to give life, meaning, and vitality' to the claim. Id. at 808 (quoting Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305 (Fed.Cir.1999)). [I]f the preamble helps to determine the scope of the patent claim, then it is construed as part of the claimed invention. NTP, Inc. v. Research In Motion, Ltd., 392 F.3d 1336, 1358 (Fed.Cir. 2004). 54 In this case, the preamble notes that the claimed method is for storing data in a distributed computer system which has at least three processor systems. '312 patent, col. 22, ll. 17-18. The preamble further describes the components of a processor system to be at least one central processing unit and at least one mass storage subsystem. Id., col. 22, ll. 19-20. The body outlines the claimed method, the steps of which repeatedly involve  said processor systems. Id., col. 22, ll. 22-29 (emphasis added). The preamble provides the only antecedent basis and thus the context essential to understand the meaning of processor system; therefore, the preamble, including the phrase distributed computer system, limits the scope of the claimed invention. NTP, 392 F.3d at 1358-59 (relying on preamble of method claim to define scope of limitations that derived their antecedent basis from preamble). 55 The issue then is how, if at all, the preamble phrase distributed computer system impacts the scope of processor system. The parties agree that the ordinary meaning of distributed computer system is a computer system in which several interconnected computers share the computing tasks assigned to the system. IEEE 375 (defining distributed system). The parties dispute whether a distributed computer system requires that each processor within the system operate on its own power supply and clock, i.e., that each processor stand-alone. Seachange argues that the IEEE definition implies multiple stand-alone computers and that stand-alone computers are necessary to implement RAID-5 at the system level. However, the IEEE definition does not say that computers must have a separate clock and power supply. Furthermore, Seachange points to nothing in the specification to suggest that the processors must stand-alone in order to achieve redundancy at the system level. Indeed, neither the claim nor the written description states such a requirement. See, e.g., '312 patent, col. 22, ll. 17-29; col. 2, ll. 17-23; col. 3, ll. 27-35; col. 4, ll. 36-44; col. 5, ll. 52-58. The written description describes a system where if one processor fails, another can perform the task that the failed processor was performing. See, e.g., id., col. 16, ll. 23-27. Such a system is consistent with the requirement that the processors share computing tasks. 56 Because it is improper to import a limitation into a claim where the limitation has no basis in the intrinsic record, Ecolab, Inc. v. Envirochem, Inc., 264 F.3d 1358, 1366 (Fed.Cir.2001), we conclude that the district court erred in requiring that each processor system stand-alone, i.e., have a separate clock and power supply. Distributed computer system should be given its ordinary meaning, which both parties agree is a computer system in which several interconnected computers share computing tasks assigned to the system.