Fairchild Semiconductor Corp. v. Power Integrations, Inc. is a patent infringement case involving semiconductors, power supplies, and LED circuits. The plaintiff, Fairchild, asserted three patents, and the defendant, Power Integrations, counterclaimed alleging infringement of five additional patents. Following a Markman hearing in July, Judge Stark has now issued a claim construction order in the case. Judge Stark construed the following terms:
– “a second feedback signal associated with a current control loop”
– “generates the first feedback signal by sampling a voltage from the auxiliary winding of the transformer and a discharge time of the transformer”
– “generating the first feedback signal by sampling a voltage from the auxiliary winding of the transformer and a discharge time of the transformer”
– “means for regulating the power supply system”
– “the control circuit and the feedback circuit are operable to regulate”
– “the feedback circuit operable to support regulation by the control circuit”
– “generating a LED current for controlling the LED”
– “a sense terminal of the control circuit, coupled to the LED for detecting a LED voltage, wherein the LED voltage is coupled for adjusting the LED current”
– “a soft start circuit means”
– “An oscillator that provides a maximum duty cycle signal comprising an on-state and an off-state”
– “a control circuit coupled to an input of a power converter”
– “when the electrical energy source is uncoupled from the input of the power converter”
– “a capacitance coupled between input terminals of the input of the power converter”
– “render dormant the drive signal generator”
– “power up the drive signal generator”
– “current input circuit”
– “current limit”
– “current limit adjustment signal”
– “dynamically adjust a current limit”
Fairchild Semiconductor Corp., et al. v. Power Integrations, Inc., C.A. No. 12-540-LPS, Memo. Op. at 1-25 (D. Del. Aug. 28, 2013).
Delaware IP Law Blog 