Published on:

Judge Andrews construes claims for patents related to e-TV guides and scheduling recordings/purchasing programming via computer

In United Video Properties, Inc. et al., v., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-0003-RGA (D. Del. June 22, 2012), Judge Andrews recently construed the following claim terms of the patents-in-suit directed to use of electronic television guides and setting future recordings of television programs or purchasing programming via personal computer (U.S. Patent Nos. 5,988,078; 6,275,268; 6,769,128; 7,493,643; and 7,603,690):

“viewing location”
“displaying” and “displaying … with electronic television program guide”
“program listings”
“electronic television program guide”
“standardized product”
“time and date stamping an order placed by the user with the electronic television program guide”
“multimedia informational system”
“data feed”
“video display generator”
“a receiver”
“program schedule information”
“viewer television equipment”
“program display guide”
“video-on-demand program listing”
“interactive program guide”
“determine whether the selected program is part of a package”
Judge Andrews construed the following means-plus-function terms, construing the claimed function and identifying the corresponding struction disclosed in the specification:

“means for indicating that a video clip preview is available for a video-on-demand program that is associated with a video-on-demand program listing wherein the indication is provided with
the video-on-demand program listing”
“means for displaying the video clip preview on the viewer television equipment”
“means for displaying an ordering display screen after the video clip preview of the video-on-demand program is displayed, wherein the ordering display screen provides the viewer with
the opportunity to select an ordering option to order the video-on-demand program”

United Video Properties, Inc. et al., v., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-0003-RGA (D. Del. June 22, 2…[scribd id=98189922 key=key-2kzc18qs6i1wlisoyaih]

Contact Information