Centillion Data Systems, LLC v. Qwest Communications International, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant Qwest, as the operator of “back-end processing elements,” could not infringe because the claimed invention required an end-user customer to initiate communications with the defendant’s equipment
• explaining that in order to “make” a system, the alleged infringer “would need to combine all of the claim elements”
• explaining that if the defendant did not “use” the patented invention itself, the plaintiff must show that the defendant is vicariously liable for the acts of others
• “Supplying the software for the customer to use is not the same as using the system.”
• using the same standard to analyze infringement of both system claims and apparatus claims
• analyzing system claims under a different framework: “to ‘use’ a system' for purposes of infringement, a party must put the invention into service, i.e., control the system as a whole and obtain benefit from it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).