Dietgoal Innovations LLC v. Time, Inc
Case Number: 1:13-cv-8381-JSR (Dkt. 129)
Judge Rakoff construed the following terms in U.S. Patent No. 6,585,516 (“Method and system for computerized visual behavior analysis, training, and planning”) and its associated ’516 Patent Reexamination Certificate. Several of the claim terms had previously been construed in DietGoal Innovations LLC v. Time, Inc., 12-cv-00337 (E.D. Tex.), which Judge Rakoff gave “considerable deference”.
|
Disputed Term
|
Construction of the Terms
|
|
“Customized eating goals”
|
Expressly adopting reasoning of the Eastern District of Texas on two grounds, Judge Rakoff construed the term to mean “Computer implemented, user-specific dietary objectives”.
|
|
“Picture menus” and “"Picture Menus, which displays on the User Interface meals from the Database”
|
Agreeing with the Eastern District of Texas, Judge Rakoff construed the terms to mean “a visual display on the User Interface of at least one image of a meal from the Database”.
|
|
“Meal builder”
|
“[M]odestly alter[ing]” the construction of the Eastern District of Texas for clarification, Judge Rakoff construed the term to mean “a computer program that allows the user to create a meal, modify the contents of a meal, and view the meal's impact on customized eating goals”.
|
|
“Computerized meal planning”
|
Adopting the reasoning of the Eastern District of Texas in rejecting defendants’ proposed construction, Judge Rakoff declined to impose any further construction.
|
|
“Food Object” and “Food Objects”
|
Require no further construction.
|
|
“View the resulting meals’ impact on customized eating goals” and “view the resulting meal’s impact on customized eating
goals”
|
Require no further construction.
|
|
“Database of food objects organizable into meals”
|
Rejecting defendants’ argument that conflicted with specification, Judge Rakoff ruled the term requires no further construction.
|
