History
  • No items yet
midpage
IGT v. Bally Gaming International, Inc.
659 F.3d 1109
Fed. Cir.
2011
Read the full case

Background

  • IGT sued Bally for infringement of reissue patents RE37,885 and RE38,812 covering networked gaming-device promotions; Bally cross-appealed noninfringement on some claims.
  • Patents share a common specification and describe a host-controlled network with floor controllers and file servers to reward players beyond normal payouts.
  • Promotions Power Rewards and Power Winners allegedly infringe by issuing commands to gaming devices to pay bonuses when predetermined events occur.
  • District court construed key terms (command, pay command, predetermined/predefined events, and related concepts) and granted summary judgment of infringement for Power Rewards and certain Power Winners embodiments, and noninfringement for SDS/CMP embodiment.
  • This court reviews de novo and affirms the district court’s infringement rulings and claim constructions with respect to the Power Rewards and Power Winners ACSC, and noninfringement for Power Winners SDS/CMP.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
meaning of 'one' in claim 10 IGT argues 'one' means any single device receiving a command; not limited to one device overall Bally argues 'one' means one-and-only-one device per promotional period The term limits to one device per command; multiple commands allowed
transmission of a pay command upon the predetermined event IGT: pay command must flow when event occurs; may include intervening steps Bally: event must automatically cause payment; no intervening steps allowed Pay command must be transmitted upon the predetermined event; intervening steps permitted
definition of 'predetermined event' IGT: event can be random or finite as long as chosen in advance Bally: event must be determined in advance and non-random in some interpretations Predetermined event is a condition chosen in advance; can be random if predetermined
definition of 'predefined event' IGT: predefined broader than predetermined Bally: predefined has a fixed plain meaning Predefined means defined in advance; not insolubly ambiguous; treated like predetermined
meaning of 'command' or 'message' IGT: broad: any instruction to effect payment; includes non-reconfiguration commands Bally: commands must reconfigure device to cause extra payment Command/message must cause an extra payment at the device; not merely inform the player; SDS/CMP not infringing; ACSC may infringe

Key Cases Cited

  • WMS Gaming, Inc. v. International Game Technology, 184 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (word 'one' interpreted to mean one-and-only-one in certain contexts; not controlling here)
  • CCS Fitness, Inc. v. Brunswick Corp., 288 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (definiteness and claim construction principles for 'predetermined' terms)
  • Exxon Research & Eng’g Co. v. United States, 265 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (definiteness standard in claim construction)
  • Intellectual Prop. Dev., Inc. v. UA-Columbia Cablevision of Westchester, Inc., 336 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (indefiniteness and claim construction review)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: IGT v. Bally Gaming International, Inc.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Date Published: Oct 6, 2011
Citation: 659 F.3d 1109
Docket Number: 2010-1364, 2010-1365
Court Abbreviation: Fed. Cir.