23
Jun
By Eric Schweibenz
On June 22, 2010, Chief ALJ Paul J. Luckern issued a Notice regarding the Markman hearing Initial Determination (ID) in Certain Mobile Telephones And Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-703).

For background on the procedural history leading to the Markman hearing in this investigation, please see our April 28, 2010 post.

According to the portions of the ID released through the notice, ALJ Luckern construed the following terms of the sole patent at issue, U.S. Patent No. 6,292,218:

The claimed term “motion processor” was construed as a processor that processes a series of motion images using digital image processing that is different and distinct in circuitry from the digital image processing of the still processor and the claimed term “still processor” was construed as a processor that processes a captured still image using digital image processing that is different and distinct in circuitry from the digital image processing of the motion processor.

The claimed term “at least three different colors” was construed as referring to three or more distinct colors, for example red, blue and green, where each color is a phenomenon of light or visual perception that enables one to differentiate otherwise identical objects.

The claimed term “capture button” was construed as a user control physically located on the camera, though it need not be a mechanical element.

The claimed term “initiating capture of a still image while previewing the motion images” was construed as sending a signal from the capture button to the timing and controls section, said signal starting the still image capture process and being sent during the display of motion images.

The claimed phrase “each captured image having a first number of color pixel values provided in a first color pattern” was construed as each image of a scene received by the image sensor having a first number of color pixel values generated by the image sensor, provided in an arrangement of the color pixel values generated by the image sensor, where a color pixel value is a measurement of the intensity of one color of light.

The claimed phrase “captured image” was construed as an image of a scene received by the image sensor.

The claimed phrase “first number of color pixel values” was construed as the number of color pixel values generated by the image sensor, where a color pixel value is a measure of the intensity of one color.

The claimed phrase “first color pattern” was construed as the arrangement of the color pixel values generated by the image sensor.

While certifying the ID to the Commission, ALJ Luckern stated that pursuant to Order No. 5, which issued on March 31, 2010, an evidentiary hearing on violation is set to commence on September 1, 2010.   He therefore determined that “a final determination on claim construction on all claim language, or at least certain of the claim language, treated in said determination, before the commencement of the evidentiary hearing on violation on September 1, would lead to efficiencies at the violation hearing.”  ALJ Luckern accordingly requested an early decision by the Commission on this ID.
Share