Featured Posts
- Facebook Loses Reexaminations of Pragmatus’ Patents
- How is Reexamination Treating Round Rock Research?
- Reexamination has not Saved Apple against MobileMedia Patents, So Far
- What is an “Involved Application” in IPR Practice?
- Apple Victorious over Affinity Labs of Texas’ Portable Audio Player Patent
- Think IP Strategy Offers 2011 News Almanac
- An Update on Oracle’s Infringement Case against Google
- PTO Requests Public Comment on Proposed Rules for AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings
- Microsoft-i4i, Oracle-Google & VirnetX-Apple-Cisco Updates
- Oracle Patent to Emerge from Reexamination
- VirnetX again Sues for Infringement, and again Faces Reexaminations
- How Strong are Google’s Requests for Reexamination of the Lodsys Patents?
- PTO Board Sides with NVIDIA on Two Rambus “Barth I” Patents
- Oracle ‘520 Moves toward Confirmation in Reexamination
- Google Gets Mixed Result against Oracle’s Seventh Patent
- Did Google Request Reexamination of Lodsys Patents?
- Two Updates
- Oracle v. Google Android® Update
- Rambus Wins Limited Exclusion Order at ITC against NVIDIA, despite Pending Reexaminations
- 最初が肝心：不備のない再審査請求書を作成するために
- That’s My Patent You’re Reexamining…
- “Why Wait for Oppositions?” by Scott Daniels, 47 IDEA 343 (Law Review of Franklin Pierce Law School)
- The Basics
Noteworthy Links
- "The Interplay between Reexaminations, Preliminary Injunctions and Stays of Litigation" - by Dennis Crouch at PATENTLYO.COM
Favorite Patent Blogs
- All Things Pros
- CAFC Alert
- FDA Law Blog
- IPWatchdog
- Patent Docs
- Patently-O
- PLI Patent Law Practice Center
- Think IP Strategy
- US Patent Post-Grant Opposition
Recent Requests
PTO Statistics
Retailers Escalate Fight with Round Rock Research on RFID Patents
| February 2, 2012
This past December Round Rock Research launched a barrage of complaints against a who’s-who of American retailers — American Apparel, Dole Food, Fruit of the Loom, Hanesbrands, J.C. Penney, Macy’s, PepsiCo., The Gap and VF Corporation – accusing them of using ultra high frequency RFID tags and readers that infringe five patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,500,650, 5,627,544, 5,974,078, 6,459,726 and Re 41,531.
On Tuesday, reexamination requests were filed anonymously against the ‘650, ‘544, ‘726 and ‘531 patents, undoubtedly by one or more of the accused retailers. A request had already been filed and granted against the ‘078 patent.
The case will be interesting to follow if only for ubiquity of the accused tags and readers – J.C. Penney alone is believed to use them in 1,100 stores.
