The patent is directed to an electronic monitoring device that is capable of sensing and recording external parameters such as temperature, humidity, pressure, or acceleration.

Claim 1 has the contested claim term "associated with".

Apparatus for monitoring an externally applied parameter, comprising a housing enclosing:
A. a sensor having a characteristic that varies in a predetermined manner with variation of said parameter;
B. a monitoring and output network including:
i. means coupled to said sensor for generating a signal representative of variations of said characteristic over time,
ii. first storage means for storing values associated with selected portions of said signal, said selected portions including other than the most recent portion of said signal, and
iii. selectively operative means for generating an output signal representative of selected ones of said stored values; and
C. a power supply in operable communication with said sensor and said network.

TNT argued 4,745,564 (Tennes) as anticipatory.

One of the three prior art references, U.S. Patent No. 4,745,564 to Tennes (“the ’564 patent”), discloses an apparatus for measuring and recording externally applied parameters relating to goods in transit. Sensitech argues that the Tennes reference does not anticipate the ’200 patent because Tennes does not disclose the storage of values “associated with” selected portions of the external parameter signal, as required by claim 1 of the ’200 patent.

That argument is rebutted by an examination of the text of the Tennes patent. Tennes is directed to an impact-detection apparatus “for measuring and recording accelerations or other physical quantities experienced by easily damaged items of commerce such as fruit and electronic computers.” The specification of the Tennes patent states:

This invention provides an apparatus adapted to measure and record the acceleration history of commodities while they are being handled or transported. . . . It can sense accelerations along each of three coordinate axes. All three accelerations are stored as data if any one exceeds a predetermined acceleration magnitude. The apparatus also stores the time of occurrence of such accelerations, thereby providing an event-time history. This history can be read from the memory for analysis after the handling or transportation is completed.

'564 patent, col. 2, line 61, through col. 3, line 4. Thus, the Tennes patent plainly discloses the storage of values corresponding to selected signals relating to acceleration (or other parameters).

Under the proper construction of the claim limitation “values associated with selected portions of [the] signal,” it is clear from the record before the district court that no reasonable jury could find that limitation not to be anticipated by the prior art Tennes patent. That limitation was the only basis invoked by Sensitech, either in the district court or in this court, for distinguishing Tennes from the ’200 patent.

District court injunction & ruling reversed. The appeals court directed that, in any further proceedings, "the district court should consider, in light of the analysis set forth above, the validity of any remaining dependent claims as to which there may be a continuing dispute between the parties."