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
Samsung Again Attacks Murata Patent
| February 16, 2010
Samsung filed a request last Friday that the PTO conduct an ex parte reexamination of Murata’s U.S. Patent No. 6,377,439 which claims multi-layer ceramic capacitors.
In October, Murata sued Samsung at the U.S. ITC for importing into the United States ceramic capacitors that infringe the ‘439 patent, as well as three other patents belonging to Murata. The ITC’s Judge Gildea has scheduled trial for July 2010, and set March 4, 2011 as the target date by which the ITC will complete its investigation.
Read More/続きを読む
Rambus v. NVIDIA, An Updated Scorecard
| January 28, 2010
In our post dated December 1, 2009, we reported on the struggle between Rambus and NVIDIA at the ITC and in reexaminations at the PTO. Since then, Rambus has won a major victory at the ITC – Administrative Law Judge Essex has ruled that the ‘353, ‘405 and ‘109 patents are valid and infringed.1
Rambus, however, has not fared well in the reexaminations, as can be seen from the following chart.
Read More/続きを読む
Rambus v. NVIDIA, An Updated Scorecard
| December 1, 2009
In the old days of baseball, before scoreboards the size of a city block, it was said that you “need a scorecard to keep track of the players.”
That is certainly true of the current ITC investigation in which Rambus originally accused NVIDIA, as well as 16 downstream customers, of infringing nine patents related to graphics card, motherboard and computer memory controllers. After receiving adverse Office Actions from the PTO in reexaminations of several of those patents, Rambus dropped four from the ITC case.
Read More/続きを読む
