O2 Micro Intern. v. BEYOND INNOVATION TECHNOLOGY

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the district court erred by failing to resolve the parties’ dispute over the meaning of “only if” and by allowing the parties to submit to the jury arguments over the term’s legal significance
• “The purpose of claim construction is to ‘determin[e] the meaning and scope of the patent claims asserted to be infringed.’”
• “When the parties present a fundamental dispute regarding the scope of a claim term, it is the court’s duty to resolve it.”
• “When the parties raise an actual dispute regarding the proper scope of these claims, the court, not the jury, must resolve that dispute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).