The construction of a claim's term

Network Commerce v. Microsoft (Fed. Cir. 2005).

來看看法官們在 claim construction 時是怎麼解譯一個 term ，也順便看看一個 term，它在訴訟中，會出現多少的解譯方式（參照上判決連結，僅貼出部分段落）：

The claims also assume that the “download component” is a component of a larger software system, that is, the download component does not alone direct the computer hardware to perform the designated tasks. The difficulty is that the claim language is not clear as to what other programs are to be used with the “download component.”

找出解譯 term 的困難處，預先為解譯找個方向。

We construe a claim term as having its “ordinary and customary meaning,” that is, “the meaning that the term would have to a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention.” Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1313. In some cases, it is possible to construe a claim term by applying “the widely accepted meaning of commonly understood words.” Id. at 1314. “Download component” is not a claim term amenable to construction in this manner because it has no commonly understood meaning reflected in general dictionaries or similar sources. We may also rely on a term’s “particular meaning in a field of art” when construing claims. Id. As the parties seem to agree, the term “download component” does not have a specialized meaning in the relevant art. Microsoft urges that “download component” does not have a particular meaning in the computer art; and that the term does not appear in computer dictionaries and treatises.

當沒有commonly understood meaning 時才用term’s “particular meaning in a field of art”。

Network Commerce also agrees that a definition of the term “download component” as a whole does not exist, but invites the court to combine individual dictionary definitions of “download” and “component.” Under that construction, any part of a system involved in the transfer of data from one computer to another would be a download component. This is not a tenable theory in light of the specification.

那用字典來組合這樣的解譯方式可以嗎？（也算是一個用來解譯 term 的方法。）不過最後還是得回到說明書中如何使用這個字，來進行解譯才是。

整 理這一篇是因為判例中解譯一個term的方式提出了好幾種，其中用combine individual dictionary definitions of “download” and “component”，是我潛意識下所使用的方式。就當作用來提醒自己隨時注意說明書對一個 term 的使用方式。

PS：
Coombs’ declaration provides scant support for Network Commerce’s position. As we recently reaffirmed in Phillips, “conclusory, unsupported assertions by experts as to the definition of a claim term are not useful to a court.” Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1318. Here Coombs does not support his conclusion with any references to industry publications or other independent sources. Moreover, expert testimony at odds with the intrinsic evidence must be disregarded. Id. (“[A] court should discount any expert testimony that is clearly at odds with the claim construction mandated by . . . the written record of the patent.”). That is the case here.

at odds：不一致。

“conclusory, unsupported assertions by experts as to the definition of a claim term are not useful to a court.”

專家證詞如果沒有supported的話，不足為取。