Free Appendix - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01230—G|\/IS Document 59-22 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 1 013
RI.F1—2409499·1

Case 1:04-cv-01230—Gl\/IS Document 59-22 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 2 of 3
l
FHJED UNDER SEAL.- SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL. MATERIAL
{N THE UNITE!) STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

AP!’l..ERA CORPORATION, )
MDS LNC., and APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS/MDS ) Civil Action Nu- O0-CV—I05
SCIEX, )
)
PiaintiI“IIs, ) [ION. RODERICK McKEL.VI}E
) , .
` v. ) MAGISTRATE TIZIYNGE
A " I
MICROMASS UK LTD-, and MICROMASS, )
INC., )
Dcfcmiznnts., )

DEFENDANTS"Ol’ENING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF
Filed? November 9, 200l
Robert W Whetzel (#2288)
Chad Shzmdler (#3796)
RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGEZR
One Rodney Square
PO. Box 551
Wilmington, DE l9899
(302) 658-6541
lames G. Hunter, Jr.
Kenneth G. Schuler __
Kevin C. May
LATHAM & WATKFNS
Sears Tower, Suite 5800
Chicago, IL 60606
(312) 876-7700 A-
A`ITORN"EYS FOR DEFENDANTS
MICROMASS UK LTD ANI)
MICROMASS, INC.
TA 333
-T 01392
CONFIDENTIAL W
' ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY
PURSUANT T0 PROTECTIVE ORDER A

Case 1:04-cv-01230—Gl\/IS Document 59-22 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 3 of 3
claim requires that "the pressure in said second chamber be[] a very low pressure for operation of
said second rod set as a mass f‘iltcr.." Q; td; Ht Claim Elcmfmt l(i) (ABS); 595 $9 @ H1 Claim
Element Mtg) (A86) ("purnping gas from said second chamber to maintain the pressure in said
second chamber at a substantially lower pressure than that of the chamber, for effective mass
tilter operation olsaid second rod set .")..
Given the plain meaning ofthe terrn "second," the claims ofthe "I36 Patent also
mandate that the requisite "sccond vacuum chamber" come next after the iirst in the vacuum
system of the mass spectrometer. As discussed above, PlaintiI`t"s‘ statements during the
rccxamination proceedings mandate that this ordinary meaning of “second vacuum chamber" be
applied here. $0;;; disc supra at I3-IB. For example, as discussed above, Plaintiffs distinguished
French on the grounds that the pressure in its second vacuum chamber was high whereas "[t]he
second clmmber ofrhc invention is at a very low pressure" Reexamination Request (Ex l0) at
I4 (Al 79) Thus, Plaintiffs relied on the plain meaning of "second vacuum chamber" in
distinguishing the prior an. §g fg; disc. spy; at 13-18.
Further support for this construction is found in the other ciaim elements. For
instance, Claim Element I(a) requires that the "Hrst and second vacuum chambers {be] sepornred i
by a wall" §g 736 Patent (Ex. 2) at Claim Element 1(a) (ABS). By indicating what element
separates the "first" and "second" vacuum chambers, the patent makes clear that the "sccond"
in vacuum chamber is the next vacuum chamber after the first. Ln light of the prosecution history,
nothing in the specitication suggests a contrary meaning, g ig at [gt_s__@_ (A64-A86), and thus
the claim [cfm should be given its plain and ordinary meaning —— the vacuum chamber next after an
the first vacuum chamber in the mass spectrometer.
l 21
TA 334
ETEZEZEELEEEEZLQLE We vt 4t 8
punsuanr rc pnersenve ertusn