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
Google and Yahoo! Attack on Browser Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 26, 2011
| January 3, 2012
Google and Yahoo! have requested reexamination of a browser patent owned by Interval Licensing (see ex parte Request No. (3)). Interval had already sued the two companies for infringement of the patent. Google and Microsoft have requested reexamination of a patent owned by Paid Search Engine Tools for a bid management system (see inter partes Request No. (1)). As above, there is a pending infringement action regarding the patent in question. This approach of two or more companies jointly requesting reexamination is becoming more common.
Ex parte reexamination was requested by an unidentified party against Intellect Wireless’ U.S. Patent No. 7,266,186 claiming a paging receiver and system (see ex parte Request No. (1)). Intellect Wireless has sued a number of companies – among them HTC, RIM, AT&T Mobility — for infringement of the ‘186 patent, as well as for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,310,416. HTC America filed inter partes requests against the ‘186 patent at the beginning of October, and against the ‘416 patent in November. Non-final rejections have already issued against both Intellect Wireless patents. According to HTC, the infringement action has been “effectively stayed pending a ruling” on HTC’s motion for summary judgment of inequitable conduct. The various reexaminations might have an impact on HTC’s inequitable conduct allegations.
Read More/続きを読む
Challenges to Five Ronald Katz Telephone Patents, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 19, 2011
| December 27, 2011
Perhaps more than any other inventor, Ronald Katz has been the target of rivals’ requests for reexamination. This was certainly true this past week, when requests were filed against five Katz telephone system patents (see ex parte Request Nos. (1), (3) to (5) & (10)). According to Patent Office assignment records, the five patents are owned by General Electric Capital.
Vicor requested reexamination of a SynQor power converter patent (see inter partes Request No. (5)). Synqor has sued a number of companies, including Ericsson, for infringement of that patent.
And Ford has requested reexamination of a GM patent for a car body structure, specifically a roof panel-side frame construction (see inter partes Request No. (3)).
Read More/続きを読む
Cisco Challenge to Two VirnetX Network Patents, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 12, 2011
| December 20, 2011
VirnetX, having long ago vanquished Microsoft, is now in a difficult infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas against Cisco and a number of other network-makers. Last week Cisco requested reexamination of two VirnetX patents (see inter partes Request Nos. (3) & (8) – U.S. Patent Nos. 7,418,504 and 7,921,211.
Knowles Electronics is involved in a rather complicated litigation position. First, it sued Analog Devices in Illinois for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,439,616 and 7,537,964, and then, at the beginning of this month, it filed an ITC Complaint against Analog Devices, Amkor and Avnet for infringement of the ‘964 patent, plus infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,018,049. Reexamination requests were filed last week against the ‘964 and ‘049 patent (see inter partes Request Nos. (1) & (2)), and reexamination was requested against the ‘616 patent last May. This multi-front dispute creates another opportunity for interaction between the respective forums.
Reexamination is rarely requested for design patents, but two requests were filed last week (see ex parte Request Nos. (7) & (17)). Challenges by reexamination to design patents seem to do much better than those in District Court.
Volkswagen requested reexamination of a GPS patent owned by Beacon Navigation who has sued a number of automakers for infringement of the patent (see inter partes Request No. (4)).
LG Attack on Whirlpool Refrigerator Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 5, 2011
| December 12, 2011
LG has requested reexamination of Whirlpool patent for icemakers (see inter partes Request No. 3). The Whirlpool patent is already the subject of a declaratory judgment action in Delaware, also filed by LG. The two companies have been involved in a series of disputes over refrigerator patents.
Hitachi Koki has requested reexamination of seven Milwaukee Electronic Tool patents for lithium battery packs for hand-tools (see inter partes Request Nos. (8) to (10) and ex parte Request Nos. (5) to (8)). Milwaukee has sued Hitachi in the Eastern District of Wisconsin for infringing the patents
Reexamination was also requested for two Ronald Katz patents for a telephonic lottery (see ex parte Request Nos. (3) & (4). Katz patents have been the subject of quite a number of reexaminations over the years.
Attack on Lam Research Plasma Processing Patent, Among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of November 28, 2011
| December 5, 2011
Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment has requested reexamination of Lam Research’s U.S. Patent No. 5,998,932 related to plasma processing equipment (see ex parte Request No. (6)). Lam has sued AMFE for infringement of the Taiwanese counter-part patent and might soon sue in the United States for infringement of the ‘932 patent.
Reexamination was also requested for a Xerox patent (see inter partes Request No. (5)), but the identity of the requester is not shown in the PTO records.
Microsoft, Sharp & Mitsubishi Electric Requests of their Own Patents, among Reexamination Requests Filed Week of November 21, 2011
| November 28, 2011
It is somewhat unusual these days for a patent owner to seek reexamination of its own patents. Yet last week, three sophisticated patent owners – Microsoft, Sharp and Mitsubishi Electric – did just that (see ex parte Request Nos. (3), (4) & (7)). A patent owner might request reexamination of its own patent where a prospective licensee has asserted that certain prior art undermines the validity of the patent and the patent owner is confident that it can successfully test that assertion of prior art at the PTO.
Taiwan Semiconductor has requested reexamination of Tela Innovations’ U.S. Patent No. 7,441,211 for digital circuit optimization (see inter partes Request No. (1)). In 2009 the companies announced “a strategic partnership to develop co-optimized design solutions using Tela’s innovative and patented lithography-optimized design technology and TSMC’s derivative processes.” There does not appear, however, to be any litigation between the two.
HP Request for Reexamination of Nomadix Internet-User Redirection Patent, among the Requests Filed Week of November 14, 2011
| November 21, 2011
Two years ago, Nomadix sued Hewlett-Packard and a host of other companies for infringement of six Internet-systems patents. HP has now requested reexamination of one of those patents, U.S. Patent No. 6,633,894 (see inter partes Request No. (12)). An earlier reexamination of Nomadix’s ‘894 patent resulted in confirmation of the patentability of each claim without amendment.
A10 Networks has requested reexamination of four more Brocade server patents last week (see inter partes Request Nos. (4), (6), (8) & (9)).
On Friday reexamination was also requested against David Breed’s car occupant restraint patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,942,248 owned by Automotive Technologies International (see ex parte Request No. (9)). ATI has alleged infringement of the ‘248 patent by Honda and Hyundai, among others.
Microsoft Challenge to NetView Patent, among the Reexamination Requests filed Week of November 7, 2011
| November 14, 2011
Inter partes reexamination continues to be the weapon of choice for major Internet/software companies. Last week Microsoft requested reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 7,251,776 owned by NetView (see inter partes Request No. (1)). NetView is pursuing an action against Microsoft in Massachusetts, asserting infringement of the ‘776 patent.
Inter partes reexamination was also requested against U.S. Patent No. 7,426,264 which claims methods for mobile messaging and which is owned by Intellect Wireless (see inter partes Request No. (6)). It is not yet clear who filed the Request, but Intellect Wireless has previously sued Apple, Heio, HTC, LG, Samsung, Sanyo, T-Mobile, and Virgin Mobile for infringement of related patents.
After requesting reexamination of six Brocade server patents the previous week, A10 Networks filed three more requests last week. (see inter partes Request Nos. (3), (4) & (7)).
Google Challenge to Tierravision Geographic Database Patent among the Reexamination Requests Filed week of October 31, 2011
| November 7, 2011
Earlier this year Tierravision sued Microsoft, RIM and Google, accusing them of selling Internet-based map services that infringe U.S. Reissue Patent No. 41,983. Google has now replied by requesting reexamination of the ‘983 patent (see inter partes Request No. (3)). Google’s Request is a bit spicier than most. At the very outset, it asserts that “Tierravision buried the 18 claims subject to reexamination in a wildly varied set of 70 total claims,” with the result that “[t]hey bear little or no resemblance to the claims of the original patent, yet the original Examiner subjected them to virtually no scrutiny, allowing them in the first action without any explanation.” It seems likely that RIM and Microsoft will file their own Requests.
Research in Motion has requested reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 6,055,439 owned by MobileMedia Ideas (see ex parte Request No. (14)). The ‘439 patent was originally assigned to Nokia and is one of a portfolio of mobile phone patents assigned by either Nokia or Sony to MobileMedia.
And A10 Networks has struck back at Brocade Communications Systems, requesting reexamination of six Brocade server patents (see inter partes Request Nos. (5) – (10)). The six patents are the subject of a law suit between the two companies in the Northern District of California.
Augme Attack on Yahoo! Streaming Media Patents among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of October 24, 2011
| October 31, 2011
Last week Augme upped the ante in its patent fight with Yahoo! by requesting reexamination of two Yahoo! streaming media patents (see inter partes Request Nos. ((4) & (5)). Yahoo! has accused Augme and its partner World Talk Radio of infringing the patents by operating websites and related infrastructure that employ Augme’s “BoomBox” technology. The accused websites are VoiceAmericaTM and World Talk RadioTM Network.
Cisco has requested reexamination of a VirnetX network protocol patent – U.S. Patent No. 7,188,180 – which is one of six VirnetX patents in litigation in the Eastern District of Texas (see inter partes Request No. (2)). Cisco’s request follows requests from the previous week by Apple regarding two other VirnetX network protocol patents – U.S. Patent Nos. 7,418,504 and 7,921,211.
A request was also filed against an Affinity Labs content delivery method patent (see ex parte Request No. (3)). Affinity Labs has sued Apple for infringing the patent, though Apple is not likely to be the requester.
