"Logical inconsistency" of an asserted claim resulted in a ruling of invalidity for lack of enablement and utility. "The primary trouble occurs within steps (1) and (2) . . . [T]he only way step (2) can ever be performed is if a 'data information message' is a subset of an 'unmodified message.' However, the preamble of claim 3 itself differentiates 'data information messages' from 'unmodified messages' and 'control messages' . . . Finally, if step 2 somehow is performed, it explicitly requires the performance of step (8), which in turn requires that 'if the message is a control message parsing and processing the control message.' Again, step (8) cannot be performed if a receiver is configured only to receive 'data information messages.' There is a clear logical inconsistency within the claims."
Michael S. Sutton Ltd. v. Nokia Corp. et al., 6-07-cv-00203
(TXED August 10, 2009, Memorandum Opinion & Order) (Davis, J.)