Federal Circuit IP
Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. MediaPointe, Inc.
Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. MediaPointe, Inc.
Case No. 24-1571, Decided November 25, 2025
Panel: Taranto, Stoll, Cunningham
Overview:
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment that certain claims of two patents directed to intelligent distribution networks for streaming media were invalid for indefiniteness and that remaining claims were not infringed. The decision clarifies the standard for indefiniteness of terms of degree (“optimal”/“best”).
Facts/Background:
- Patents at issue: U.S. Patent Nos. 8,559,426 and 9,426,195, covering systems for routing streamed media via an intelligent distribution network using trace routes to select nodes and routes.
- Akamai sought declaratory judgment of noninfringement; MediaPointe counterclaimed for infringement. Akamai counter claimed for invalidity.
- District court held claims reciting “optimal” or “best” routes/nodes indefinite and granted summary judgment of noninfringement for surviving claims.
- MediaPointe appealed both rulings.
Issues:
(i) Whether claims using “optimal”/“best” language are indefinite under §112.
(ii) Whether summary judgment of noninfringement was proper for claims requiring “receiving an initial request for media content.”
CAFC Decision and Analysis:
- Indefiniteness: Affirmed. Terms of degree must provide objective boundaries – which requires definition to be (1) reasonably clear and (2) exclusive. Here, “optimal”/“best” lacked clear standards—trace-route results were not exclusive, as the specification allowed for other open-ended factors without guidance on prioritization. Further, thee terms were not reasonably clear as multiple metrics (hops, latency, reliability) could diverge without instructions.
- Noninfringement: Affirmed. Even considering excluded expert testimony, no genuine dispute existed. The claim required a “request for media content” to be received by a management center. Evidence showed Akamai’s Mapper received only DNS queries, which do not identify requested content. Thus, limitation 1[a] was not met.
Holding:
Judgment of invalidity for indefiniteness and summary judgment of noninfringement affirmed.
Takeaways:
- Terms of degree like “optimal” or “best” require clear, objective boundaries in the specification – i.e., must be (1) reasonably clear as to which parameter/factor is prioritized over others and (2) exclusive as two which parameters optimization is based on.