Tellabs Ops., Inv. v. Fujitsu Ltd., No. 08 C 3379, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. July 27, 2012) (Holderman, C. J.).
Judge Holderman denied plaintiffs’ (collectively “Tellabs”) motion for summary judgment of invalidity in this patent case. Tellabs’ two pieces of prior art were both dated before the patents’ earliest priority date. But defendant Fujitsu offered inventor testimony corroborated by a technical paper that the invention was reduced to practice before the prior art dates. As a result, there was a question of fact as to whether Tellabs’ references were, in fact, prior art.
Additionally, the Court denied Tellabs’ motion as to obviousness. While Tellabs’ references proved that one of ordinary skill would have known that optical transmission systems had a variable number of channels. But the prior art did not teach the patents’ particular solutions.