This past Tuesday, Judge James L. Robart held a telephonic hearing in the Microsoft-Motorola RAND breach of contract dispute taking place in his W.D. Wash. court. As we discussed last week, the hearing centered on Microsoft’s request that the court release a previously-ordered $100 million bond — a bond that it had required Microsoft to
Microsoft-Motorola update part two: “Bond. $100M Bond.”
Yesterday we noted that Microsoft and Motorola are arguing over a couple of issues in the lead-up to the August breach of contract jury trial taking place in Judge Robart’s court in Seattle. The two issues are only tangentially related: Microsoft would like Judge Robart to release the $100 million bond that he previously required Microsoft to post as security for the preliminary injunction that prevented Motorola from enforcing a German standard-essential patent injunction; Motorola argues that Microsoft has failed to produce discovery that supports its claim for RAND breach-related damages that stems from measures Microsoft took to move its German distribution center, in case Motorola did obtain and enforce an injunction.
Judge Robart set an expedited “letter-briefing” schedule on these issues and will hold a telephonic oral argument next week. After the jump, we’ll take a quick look at the parties’ briefs and arguments.
Continue Reading Microsoft-Motorola update part two: “Bond. $100M Bond.”
Microsoft-Motorola update: Parties spar over discovery issues, and Microsoft wants its bond money back
It’s been relatively quiet in the Western District of Washington over the past couple weeks, as Motorola and Microsoft move forward toward an August jury trial on Microsoft’s RAND-based breach of contract claims. But according to a minute order filed by the court this past Tuesday, this week the parties raised two separate disputes for
Texas jury finds router makers infringe Ericsson WiFi patents (Ericsson v. D-Link et al.)
Over the past couple weeks, a jury trial was held in Tyler, Texas on Ericsson’s November 2010 complaint that wireless equipment makers D-Link Corp., Belkin International, Netgear, Acer, Gateway, Dell, and Toshiba infringe several Ericsson patents related to the IEEE 802.11 wireless networking standard and 802.11-compliant equipment (case no. 6:10-cv-00473). Yesterday, the jury returned its
WiFi equipment suppliers Cisco and HP step in and file declaratory judgment actions against Innovative Wireless Solutions LLC
Earlier this week, we provided an update on the multitude of WiFi-related infringement lawsuits brought by non-practicing entity Innovative Wireless Solutions LLC against various hotels and restaurants in Texas, noting that IWS had dismissed these suits (albeit without prejudice). We had discussed that this was a decidedly “un-Innovatio-like” turn in the cases — but yesterday brought a development that makes this series of disputes much more like the ones in the Northern District of Illinois involving Innovatio: Cisco Systems Inc., a supplier of WiFi equipment for many of the hotels accused of infringement, got involved. And Just like it did with Innovatio, Cisco here filed a declaratory judgment action against IWS, seeking declarations of invalidity and non-infringement as to IWS’s three asserted patents.
[UPDATE] In addition to Cisco, Hewlett-Packard has also filed a declaratory judgment action against IWS. The link is below, and more details on that complaint are at the bottom of this post — including information about a potential license defense. [/UPDATE]
[SECOND UPDATE] On Friday, June 14, Ruckus Wireless, another WiFi equipment supplier, also filed a declaratory judgment complaint against IWS. This complaint is very similar to the one filed by Cisco. [/SECOND UPDATE]
[Cisco Systems Inc v Innovative Wireless Solutions LLC Complaint]
[Hewlett-Packard-Company v. Innovative-Wireless-Solutions-LLC Complaint]
[Ruckus Wireless v. Innovative Wireless Solutions Complaint]
Cisco’s complaint, filed in the Western District of Texas (where Rackspace has chosen to take on noted NPE Parallel Iron in another DJ action), includes some particularly harsh words for IWS —
Continue Reading WiFi equipment suppliers Cisco and HP step in and file declaratory judgment actions against Innovative Wireless Solutions LLC
Innovative Wireless Solutions dismisses dozens of WiFi-related infringement lawsuits brought against hotels & restaurants
In late April we shared with you the litigation activities of Innovative Wireless Solutions LLC, a non-practicing entity that filed 40+ lawsuits in the Eastern District of Texas against a variety of hotels, hotel chains, and restaurants/coffee shops/delis. IWS asserted that by providing wireless interest service to their customers, these defendants infringed three patents
MPHJ Technology Investments seeks removal of Vermont consumer protection action to federal court
We’re going to take a brief time-out from SEP issues here for a short update on a case that’s being watched with interest by many in the patent world — the Vermont Attorney General’s consumer protection action brought last month against MPHJ Technology Investments, the so-called “scanner patent troll.” (For details on the complaint filed by the Vermont AG, see our previous post.)
It’s a somewhat mundane, and not surprising (but still noteworthy) development — This past Friday, MPHJ filed a notice of removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1441, seeking to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, as opposed to the State of Vermont Superior Court (where it was filed by the attorney general). Apparently, MPHJ likes its chances much better in federal court than in state court.Continue Reading MPHJ Technology Investments seeks removal of Vermont consumer protection action to federal court
PatentMarks Communications asserts that devices transferring files over cellular or WiFi networks infringe newly-issued patent
On June 4, a patent holding company named PatentMarks Communications LLC filed patent infringement lawsuits in the District of Delaware against a slew of electronics companies. The companies accused of infringement include at least Dell, Futurewei, HTC, Kyocera, LG, Motorola Mobility, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, and ZTE. (The complaint against HTC [LINK here] is
Group of MPEG LA licensors accuse Curtis International and others of infringing ATSC-essential digital television patents
For the second time in a couple of weeks, members of a standard-essential patent pool have filed an infringement lawsuit. Last month, it was Blu-ray patent pool One-Blue (and several licensors) filing suit against Imation Corp. Yesterday, a group of licensors to the MPEG LA Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) digital television patent pool
Intellectual Ventures files suit, accuses bank of infringing data security standard-essential patents
Well-known non-practicing entity Intellectual Ventures has been fairly quiet on the litigation front, particularly as compared to other high-profile NPEs. And when IV has filed suits, it has generally targeted technology companies, such as semiconductor manufacturers, handset makers, or telecom service providers. But earlier this week, IV branched out into new territory, suing the