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
Inter Partes Review Sought for ZOLL’s Patient Monitoring Patent
| June 3, 2013
Late last year ZOLL Medical sued Respironics, the apnea treatment device-maker, for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,681,003 that claims a patient data monitoring system. Respironics has now replied by requesting inter partes review of the ‘003 patent (see inter partes review Request No. (5).
Oracle has filed a second inter partes review request against Clouding IP’s U.S. Patent No. 6,631,449 (see inter partes review Request No. (4). The two companies are locked in a sprawling patent dispute.
The following inter partes review requests were filed:
(1) IPR2013-00312 (electronically filed) – U.S. Patent No. 5,818,836 entitled METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ANONYMOUS VOICE COMMUNICATION USING AN ONLINE DATA SERVICE and owned by Click-to-Call Technologies LP. Filed May 28, 2013 by Oracle. Click-to-Call Technologies asserted the ‘836 patent against a number of defendants, including Oracle, Carnival Cruise Lines, and BMO Harris Bank N.A., in a patent infringement litigation styled Click to Call Technologies LP v. Oracle Corporation, et al. (Case No. 1:12-cv-00468-SS (W.D. Tex.)). The ‘836 patent is also the subject matter of litigations styled Click to Call Technologies LP v. eHarmony, Inc. (Case No. 1:12-cv-00469-SS (W.D. Tex.)); Click to Call Technologies LP v. AT&T, Inc., et al. (Case No. 1:12-cv-00465-SS (W. D. Tex.)).
