Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Bell Atlantic Network Service v. Covad Communications

Date: 08-17-2001

Case Number: 00-1475

Judge: Gajarsa

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Plaintiff's Attorney: Richard G. Taranto, Farr & Taranto, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Of counsel on the brief were George C. Lombardi, and James F. Hurst, Winston & Strawn, of Chicago, Illinois; Adam T. Bernstein, Verizon Communications, of New York, New York; and John Thorne, Verizon Services, Inc., of Arlington, Virginia.

Defendant's Attorney: Ruffin B. Cordell, Fish & Richardson P.C., of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees. With him on the brief were Michael J. McKeon, and Lauren A. Degnan.

Description:

Bell Atlantic Network Services, Inc. ("Bell Atlantic") is the owner of United States Patent No. 5,812,786 ("the '786 patent"), which concerns certain data transmission services, particularly certain digital subscriber line ("DSL") services.[1] In 1999, Bell Atlantic brought this patent infringement action against Covad Communications Company, Inc., DIECA Communications, Inc., and Covad Communications Group, Inc. (collectively "Covad"), alleging that certain DSL services offered by Covad infringe the '786 patent. On April 4, 2000, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ("district court") determined that certain limitations required by claims 1 and 21 of the '786 patent are not present in Covad's DSL systems either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and granted Covad's motion for summary judgment of noninfringement. Bell Atlantic Network Servs. v. Covad Communications Group, Inc., No. 2:99cv712, slip. op. at 28 (E.D. Va. Apr. 4, 2000). Bell Atlantic appeals that judgment.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text
of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:

For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Unknown

Defendant's Experts:

Unknown

Comments:

Reported by Kent Morlan

About This Case

What was the outcome of Bell Atlantic Network Service v. Covad Communications?

The outcome was: For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

Which court heard Bell Atlantic Network Service v. Covad Communications?

This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, VA. The presiding judge was Gajarsa.

Who were the attorneys in Bell Atlantic Network Service v. Covad Communications?

Plaintiff's attorney: Richard G. Taranto, Farr & Taranto, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Of counsel on the brief were George C. Lombardi, and James F. Hurst, Winston & Strawn, of Chicago, Illinois; Adam T. Bernstein, Verizon Communications, of New York, New York; and John Thorne, Verizon Services, Inc., of Arlington, Virginia.. Defendant's attorney: Ruffin B. Cordell, Fish & Richardson P.C., of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees. With him on the brief were Michael J. McKeon, and Lauren A. Degnan..

When was Bell Atlantic Network Service v. Covad Communications decided?

This case was decided on August 17, 2001.