Claim Construction Sticks in Bamboo Flooring Case

Judge Leighton resolved a motion for reconsideration of an order construing the terms "random orientation" as used in U.S. Patent No. 5,543,197, in an order that was issued over four months ago (previous posts here and here). The primary bone of contention was that the Court had construed these terms to require not only random orientation of the individual bamboo strands, but also random, "not uniform," lengths.

In refusing to reconsider its interpretation of the term "random orientation," Judge Leighton reasoned as follows:

"Teragren argues that the ‘197 patent describes a beam that contains bamboo segments randomly oriented vertically, horizontally, and rotationally, but that are not necessarily lapped or staggered, and are not necessarily of random (or non-uniform) lengths. Teragren effectively argues that the beams described in the patent could be like a box of uncooked spaghetti; the individual segments are randomly placed, but are of uniform length and are not staggered."

Relying primarily on statements in the prosecution history arguing patentability over a specific prior art reference, and arguing "The advantage is that the randomness of this process assures a uniform and length-wise staggered stacking of the bamboo segments, allowing the length of the beams to exceed the length of the bamboo segments themselves and negating any weaknesses of the discontinuity of the annular rings."

That was enough for the Court to conclude that the claims should limit the term "random orientation" to require random, non-uniform lengths.

On another issue, the Court granted reconsideration, clarifying its Markman ruling as follows:

"The Court’s Markman Ruling was not intended to address whether an embodiment which adds a layer or lamination to an otherwise infringing product necessarily is or is not an infringement. Nothing in the Court’s prior Ruling should be construed as a determination of that issue. If and to the extent this clarifies the Court’s prior Ruling, the Motion for reconsideration on this issue is GRANTED."

teragrenMRecon.pdf