The Regents of the University of Michigan v. Leica Microsystems Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY Case No. 19-cv-07470-WHO
OF MICHIGAN,
8 Plaintiff, ORDER ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION 9 AND MOTION TO STRIKE v. 10 Re: Dkt. Nos. 98, 102
LEICA MICROSYSTEMS INC.,
11 Defendant.
12 13 Currently before me are the parties’ disputes over the appropriate construction of three sets 14 of claim terms and plaintiff The Regents of the University of Michigan’s (Michigan’s) motion to 15 strike the testimony of defendant Leica Microsystems, Inc.’s (Leica’s) claim construction expert 16 Wayne Knox. Dkt. No. 102. As discussed below, I construe the first set of terms in Leica’s favor, 17 but reject both sides’ proposed constructions of the second and third set of terms, adopting instead 18 the plain meaning of those terms. Given that ruling, the motion to strike the testimony of Knox is 19 no longer relevant and the motion to strike is DENIED as moot.1 20 DISCUSSION 21 I. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION 22 U.S.…