## Facts

- Fantasy Sports Properties, Inc. owned (as assignee) U.S. Patent No. 4,918,603 covering a computer-implemented fantasy football game using real-player statistics to award points to fantasy teams.
- The patent described awarding standard points for scoring plays and also awarding “bonus points” based on factors such as the difficulty or unusual nature of a play.
- During prosecution, claims were amended to add “bonus points” limitations after prior art was cited that disclosed fantasy-football scoring based on yardage/distance and similar performance metrics.
- SportsLine, ESPN, and Yahoo! offered online fantasy football games awarding points based on players’ real-world performance; SportsLine also offered “Commissioner.com,” which allowed user customization of scoring rules.
- Fantasy sued the defendants for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Virginia.
- The district court construed the “bonus points” limitation and granted summary judgment of noninfringement for Yahoo!, then later for SportsLine and ESPN; it denied Yahoo!’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
- Fantasy appealed the noninfringement judgments; Yahoo! cross-appealed the denial of fees.

## Issues

1. Whether the accused products infringed the ’603 patent under the proper construction of the “bonus points” limitation.
2. Whether summary judgment was improper as to SportsLine’s configurable Commissioner.com product because it could be set up to perform the claimed “bonus points” functionality.
3. Whether Yahoo! was entitled to attorney’s fees and costs because the case was “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285.

## Decision

- Affirmed summary judgment of noninfringement for Yahoo! and ESPN.
- Vacated summary judgment of noninfringement for SportsLine as to Commissioner.com and remanded because a genuine dispute of material fact existed regarding infringement capability when configured.
- Affirmed denial of Yahoo!’s request for attorney’s fees and costs under § 285.

## Legal Principles

- Claim scope may be narrowed by prosecution history; limitations added to overcome prior art restrict later infringement theories that would recapture what was distinguished.
- “Bonus points” were construed as additional points beyond standard scoring, tied to difficulty or unusual/atypical plays, and not merely alternative scoring weights for ordinary performance metrics already reflected in prior art systems.
- Summary judgment of noninfringement is proper when, under the court’s construction, no reasonable fact-finder could find that an accused product meets a claim limitation (including under the doctrine of equivalents).
- For configurable software, infringement may turn on whether the product as provided is capable of performing the claimed method through user configuration without altering underlying code; disputed capability can create a triable fact issue.
- Attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 require an “exceptional” case determination; denial is reviewed for abuse of discretion and generally requires more than an unsuccessful infringement claim.

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit held that Yahoo!’s and ESPN’s games did not satisfy the patent’s “bonus points” limitation, but found a triable issue as to whether SportsLine’s configurable Commissioner.com could be set to perform the claimed bonus-point function, requiring remand; it also upheld the denial of fees under § 285.


Fantasy Sports Props., Inc. v. Sportsline.com, Inc., 287 F.3d 1108 (Fed. Cir. 2002)