Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Adasa Inc. v. Avery Dennison Corporation

United States District Court, D. Oregon

January 22, 2019

ADASA INC., Plaintiff,
v.
AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          THOMAS M. COFFIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This is a patent action in which this court has full consent. Presently before the court is the construction of the claims. There have been no filings of motions for summary judgment at this point in the litigation.

         FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff and counter defendant ADASA Inc.'s (plaintiff Adasa) and defendant and counter claimant Avery Dennison Corporation (Defendant Avery) seek construction of the terms of plaintiff Adasa's '967 patent

         The' 967 Patent is related to merchandise tracking. As alleged by plaintiff Adasa, in merchandising tracking applications, the memory bank of an RFID[1] tag is encoded with an Electronic Product Code. The Electronic Product Code is an identifier for an item in the supply chain to uniquely identify that particular item. This identifier is serialized to be unique for avoidance of duplicate numbers among items in the supply chain.

         Plaintiff alleges that "[t]he '967 Patent generally speaking, relates in part, to systems for encoded and commissioned wireless radio frequency identification ('RFID') devices." Paragraph 7 of Complaint.

         The parties are familiar with the complex underlying technology in this field and it is addressed as needed below.A Claim Construction Hearing was held after extensive briefing on the issues.[2]

         DISCUSSION

         The applicable Claim Terms as presented by the parties and this court's constructions thereof follow.

         I. TERMS WITH AGREED UPON CONSTRUCTIONS

         1. object class information space

         The parties agree such phrase should be construed as "data field within the memory of the RFID integrated circuit chip for information identifying the class of an object, such as a company prefix, item reference code, partition value, and/or filter value."

         2. unique serial number space

         The parties agree such phrase should be construed as" data field within the memory of the RFID integrated circuit for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.