Judicial protocol in a Markman

[ckuratz]

What is the name of your state? CA

Plaintiff and Defendant each offer its own definition for a claim term. In general, it might be presumed that the Plaintiff attempts to maintain as much breadth as possible over the disputed language, while the Defendant does just the opposite.

My question is what are the options for the Court? My logical presumption is that the judge must choose one definition over the other. But is this always a black/white situation?....e.g., can a judge ever refute both definitions or come up with his own definition marrying parts of the opposing views?

 

[divgradcurl]

My question is what are the options for the Court? My logical presumption is that the judge must choose one definition over the other. But is this always a black/white situation?....e.g., can a judge ever refute both definitions or come up with his own definition marrying parts of the opposing views?

The court can pick one side or the other's construction, can come up with a "compromise" construction, or can come up with their own constuction. Read up on Markman et al. v. Westview Instruments, Inc., et al. (95-26), 517 U.S. 370 (1996), and related documents, if you want the full scope of what Markman really covers.