Microsoft Corporation v. Proxyconn, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that as a general matter, we review the PTAB’s findings of fact for substantial supporting evidence in the record
• explaining that the prosecution history of a patent which has returned to the PTO for a second review is relevant to the PTO’s construction of the claims for that patent
• noting that even under the broadest-reasonable-interpre- tation standard, prosecution history can matter
• noting that even under the broadest-reasonable-interpre- tation standard, prosecution history can matter
• noting that the Board Case: 20-1828 Document: 98 Page: 12 Filed: 12/28/2021 12 INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED may not “construe claims during IPR so broadly that its constructions are unreasonable under general claim con- struction principles”
• noting that the Board Case: 20-1828 Document: 98 Page: 12 Filed: 12/28/2021 12 INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED may not “construe claims during IPR so broadly that its constructions are unreasonable under general claim con- struction principles”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).