The decisions of the district court, Amended Memorandum Opinion, JuxtaComm-Texas Software, LLC v. Axway, Inc., No. 10-CV-0011, 2011 WL 6102057 (E.D.Tex. Dec. 7, 2011), and Order, Juxtacomm-Texas Software, LLC v. Axway, Inc., No. 10-CV-0011, 2012 WL 7637197 (E.D.Tex. July 5, 2012), construing the relevant claim language of U.S. Patent No. 6,195,662 and granting the motion for summary judgment of invalidity based on 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2, are affirmed on the basis of the district court’s opinions. The language of the claims controls their construction, and the invention set forth in the claims “is not what the patentee regarded as his invention.” Allen Eng’g Corp. v. Bartell Indus., Inc., 299 F.3d 1336, 1349 (Fed.Cir. 2002).

With respect to the cross-appeal regarding the disqualification of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP (“Akin Gump”), this court dismisses the cross-appeal as moot in the present proceeding, but notes that the district court did not address the merits of the issues raised by the 2007 Retention Agreement between Akin Gump and JuxtaComm-Texas Software, LLC, which, therefore, were not adjudicated.

AFFIRMED-IN-PART AND DISMISSED-IN-PART.