CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854
AEON Law logo full color transparent

Federal Circuit Decides: Nazomi vs. Nokia

An accused device
Is considered modified
By installed software

The US District Court for the Federal Circuit has upheld a finding of non-infringement by defendants Western Digital and Sling Media in a case involving microprocessors used in consumer products.

Nazomi is the owner of two patents, 7,080,362 and 7,225,436, that describe a hardware-based Java Virtual Machine (JVM) capable of processing stack-based instructions and which can also run legacy (register-based) applications without using the JVM.

Western and Sling make consumer products that incorporate various processors. Nazomi sued them and Nokia, among others, in February of 2010 alleging that Western and Sling’s products used chip designs by ARM Limited that infringed Nazomi’s patents. The products at issue are:

· Western’s MyBook World Edition, an external storage device, and

· Sling’s Slingbox Pro-HD, a device for streaming live TV to a PC or smartphone.

The accused devices have CPUs containing an ARM core with Jazelle hardware. However, the Jazelle hardware cannot perform the functions described in Nazomi’s patent claims without software called the Jazelle Technology Enabling Kit (JTEK).

The defendants did not license the JTEK software and have never installed it on the accused devices.

Western and Sling filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the patent claims should be constructed to require that the device perform the claimed functions itself, and that the accused devices did not infringe the patents because they included only the Jazelle hardware but not the JTEK software.

Nazomi countered that claims 48 and 74 of the ‘362 patent and claims 1 and 5 of the ‘436 patent covered any software that could process stack-based instructions – regardless of whether the device actually did so.

The federal district court granted Western and Sling’s motion, finding that the accused device must itself be able of performing the claimed functions. The court construed the patent claims to require a hardware and software combination capable of processing both register-based and stack-based instructions.

Because the Jazelle hardware on its own could not process stack-based instructions, the court held that the accused devices did not infringe the Nazomi patents.

The Federal Circuit affirmed, holding that unless an alleged infringer configures or programs hardware to perform a function covered by a patent, there is no infringement.

The case is Nazomi Communications, Inc. v. Nokia Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Related Articles

Federal Circuit Finds No Motive to Combine in Laser Projector Patent Case

The Federal Circuit has reversed a finding by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) that certain challenged claims of a patent for ...
Read More

Federal Circuit Affirms Blockchain Gem Patent Is Invalid

The Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s decision finding the claims of a patent for preventing gemstone counterfeiting invalid. The case is Rady v. ...
Read More

Tennessee Passes Law Against AI Voice Copies

The state of Tennessee has passed a law against the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to copy a person’s voice. The law, signed on March ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

SERVICES

PROTECT

DEAL

DEFEND