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
Thirteen Brocade Patents among the Targets of Reexamination Requests Filed Week of June 27, 2011
| July 5, 2011
A10 Networks may have set a record last week when it requested reexamination of 13 Brocade patents involving global servers (see ex parte Request Nos. (2)-(3), (5)-(8), (11)-(17)). The parties are in litigation over those patents in the Northern District of California.
Reexamination was requested against Lambda Optical Systems’ U.S. Patent No. 6,973,229 related to optical network systems (see ex parte Request No. (9)). Lambda sued a number of network companies last year for infringement of the ‘229 patent, including Alcatel-Lucent, NEC, Fujitsu and Nokia-Siemens.
Challenge to Unigene’s Osteoporosis Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Week of June 20, 2011
| June 27, 2011
Unigene Laboratories obtained a judgment in 2009 against Apotex for infringement of Unigene’s Reissue Patent No. 40,812 covering Unigene’s FORTICAL® formulation for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The only significant issue in that case appears to have been patent validity. The case is on appeal to the CAFC. This past Wednesday, reexamination was requested for the ‘812 patent, presumably by Apotex, though the PTO records are not yet clear (see inter partes Request No. (2)).
Reexamination was requested for another Hydro-Quebec lithium battery, but the PTO records don’t yet disclose which one (see inter partes Request No. (3)) – Hydro-Quebec has at least five.
Semiconductor Patents Prominent among the Reexamination Requests the Week of June 13, 2011
| June 20, 2011
Sony has requested reexamination of Tessera’s U.S. Patent No. 6,885,106 for stacking semiconductors (see inter partes Request No. (9)). The ‘106 patent is one of a large portfolio of chip-packaging patents that Tessera has successfully enforced over the past decade.
Other Requests involving semiconductor patents were a filed by Cypress Semiconductor against an Agilent patent and by Everspin against a Nexedge patent (see inter partes Request Nos. (7) & (8)).
Also of commercial significance was a reexamination requested by A123 against a Hydro-Quebec patent for lithium batteries (see inter partes Request No. (4)). The companies are in litigation in the Northern District of Texas over that patent.
Reexamination Sought against Ogma Patent
| June 14, 2011
Yesterday an unidentified party requested reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 5,825,427, a patent of some commercial significance for motion-sensitive sound effects devices in projectors. The ‘427 patent is owned by Ogma, LLC, located in Longview, Texas.
In March Ogma sued 3M, Canon and 26 other projector-makers in Marshall, Texas, accusing them of infringing the ‘427 patent. Ogma also filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission on the basis of the ‘427 and a related patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,150,947. The ITC instituted an investigation in May. Ogma filed a second ITC complaint, which will likely be merged with the pending investigation.
YouTube Attacks on Pragmatus’s Media File Storage Patents, among Reexamination Requests Filed Week of June 6, 2011
| June 13, 2011
Earlier this year, Pragmatus sued Facebook, LinkedIn, Photobucket, and YouTube for infringing three patents for systems for storing media files. YouTube has now requested reexamination of those patents (see inter parte Request Nos. (6), (8) & (9)).
Apple has requested reexamination of Softview’s U.S. Patent No. 7,831,926 related to systems for “zooming and panning” images from the Internet on mobile devices. Softview has sued Apple and AT&T Mobility in Delaware for infringing the ‘926 patent. Softview is also involved in a separate case with HTC in Washington state regarding the ‘926 patent.
IDT requested reexamination of Alexsam’s U.S. Patent No. 6,000,608 which relates to activation of “stored value” card (see ex parte Request No. (3)). In February, Alexsam won a $9.06 million jury verdict against IDT in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of the ‘608 patent and a second patent.
TiVo Attack on Four Verizon Patents, among Reexamination Requests Filed Week of May 30, 2011
| June 6, 2011
On Thursday, TiVo requested reexamination of three Verizon cable box patents, and on Friday, of a fourth Verizon patent (see ex parte Request Nos. (9) through (12)). These requests are only the latest development in an on-going patent war between the two companies that includes fronts at the ITC and in two District Courts.
Reexamination was requested for SynQor’s U.S. Patent No. 7,272,021 for power converters (see inter partes Request No. (1)). In January, Judge Ward enjoined Artesyn/Astec and a series of other companies from infringing four SynQor patents, among them the ‘021 patent. It is not yet clear from the PTO records who filed the request.
And Abbott Diabetes Care requested reexamination of three DexCom analyte-sensor devices in the long-term patent dispute between the companies (see ex parte Request Nos. (4), (5) & (6)).
TiVo Requests Reexamination of Three Verizon Patents
| June 3, 2011
Two weeks ago ITC Administrative Law Judge James Gildea issued an Initial Determination (ID) finding that Cablevision Systems and TiVo had violated Section 337 by the importation into the United States of digital TV cable boxes that infringe TiVo’s U.S. Patent No. 6,381,748. In his ID, Judge Gildea also found that ‘748 was valid over the prior art and that a domestic industry exists in the U.S. based on the claims of the ‘748 patent. The Judge additionally determined that there was no violation of Section 337 with respect to Verizon’s four other patents-in-suit, though the public record is not clear on the specific reasons for the no-violation finding. The investigation now goes to the Commission for its review; if the Commission affirms Judge Gildea’s determination of violation, it may order the exclusion of the infringing cable boxes from the U.S. and prohibit future sales of infringing cable boxes that are already in the U.S.
Yesterday, TiVo took steps to deal with Judge Gildea’s determination of violation by requesting reexamination of the ‘748 patent. TiVo might be hoping to affect the ITC’s decision on a suitable remedy for the violation, but in the past the Commission not considered pending reexaminations at the remedy stage of a case. TiVo might also hope to affect the Commission’s consideration of any prior art validity issues raised in Judge Gildea’s ID, but the ‘748 reexamination is likely filed too late to affect the Commission’s review of those issues. Or perhaps, TiVo’s goal with the reexaminations is to affect the outcome of co-pending infringement litigation. When the content of TiVo’s reexamination request becomes public, its strategy might be more evident.
Sony Challenge to Olympic Developments Internet Game Patent, among Reexamination Requests Filed Week of May 23, 2011
| May 31, 2011
Sony Computer Entertainment America and Sony requested reexamination of a patent for a remote control device for Internet games, licensed to Olympic Developments, AG. (see ex parte Request No. (2)). The parties are currently involved in litigation over that patent, as well as U.S. Patent No. 5,435,585, in the Central District of California.
Requests were filed by eBiosciences against three patents for nanocrystal probes used for medical testing (see ex parte Request Nos. (17), (18) & (19)). The patents are the subject of a law suit in the Southern District of California and are owned, according to PTO assignment records, by Institutional Venture Partners that describes itself as “premier later-stage venture capital and growth equity firm.”
An interesting strategy was employed by Holburn, when it simultaneously requested reexamination of a Guy Carpenter & Co. patent for assessing risk and filed a complaint seeking a declaratory judgment for patent invalidity and non-infringement (see inter partes Request No. (1)).
Texas Jury Awards Fractus $23 Million against Samsung; Reexaminations of Patents Continue.
| May 25, 2011
On Monday a jury in the Eastern District of Texas returned a verdict in Fractus v. Samsung finding that Samsung’s cellular telephones infringed four Fractus patents, that the infringement was willful, and that the all four patents were valid over the prior art. The damages award was $23,129,321, a sum that Judge Leonard Davis might increase in view of the jury’s willfulness finding. A detail that must annoy Samsung is that the jury deliberated for only two hours.
But that is not the whole story. As we reported in April, each of Samsung, Kyocera and HTC (Fractus having also sued the latter two for infringement) is pursing inter partes reexaminations against the Fractus patents. Attached is a chart showing the current status of the 12 reexaminations. Each of the claims of the four Fractus patents-in-suit has been rejected. Although the rejections are non-final, and Fractus has ample opportunity to overcome them, they appear, at least to this outsider, to be rather strong. Plus, the PTO is advancing the reexaminations expeditiously, so that some of the Fractus claims might soon be facing final rejections.
Apple Attack on MONKEYmedia Audiovisual Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of May 16, 2011
| May 23, 2011
Last December, Apple defended itself against MONKEYmedia’s patent infringement allegations in the Western District of Texas, by requesting reexamination of two of MM’s streaming media patents-in-suit. Apple has now sought reexamination of a third MM patent-in-suit (see inter partes Request No. (10)).
Reexamination was also requested by Xilinx for a circuits patent owned by Intellectual Ventures, but it is not clear from the PTO files whether the IV patent is the subject of any infringement litigation (see inter partes Request No. (8)).
And SemiLEDs Corporation has requested reexamination of a Group III nitride LED patent owned by Cree (see inter partes Request No. (7)). The companies are currently in litigation in the Middle District of North Carolina over that patent and four others.
Read More/続きを読む
