Last week Microsoft filed a reply supporting its motion to transfer to the Ninth Circuit Motorola’s appeal of Judge Robart’s RAND ruling (see our prior posts on Microsoft’s motion and Motorola’s opposition).  Microsoft argues that the Ninth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction under law of the case, because issues of the contract action being consolidated

Motorola has filed its opposition to Microsoft’s motion to transfer the appeal of Judge Robart’s RAND ruling from the Federal Circuit to the Ninth Circuit (see our prior blog on Microsoft’s motion).  Recall that Microsoft argued that the appealed action was a contract action, its nature did not change when that action was consolidated

Our prior posts discussed Complainant LSI’s comments and respondent Realtek’s comments in the ITC’s investigation of whether Realtek and Funai infringe LSI’s alleged standard essential patents (SEPs).  These comments were submitted in response to the Commission’s request for information on various issues to aid in its review of the ALJ’s conclusion that Realtek and Funai

We previously discussed the comments filed by complainant LSI in the International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation of whether Realtek and Funai infringe LSI’s alleged 802.11 and H.264 standard essential patents (SEPs).  The ALJ’s initial determination found the SEP patents were not infringed but otherwise rejected RAND-based defenses.  The Commission then decided to review the ALJ’s

Microsoft is seeking to transfer Motorola’s appeal of Judge Robart’s RAND ruling from the Federal Circuit to the Ninth Circuit.  Specifically, last Thursday, Nov. 21, Microsoft filed in the Federal Circuit a motion to transfer to the Ninth Circuit and today, Nov. 25, Microsoft filed a companion motion to terminate Motorola’s appeal through a transfer

Today Judge Robart issued an Order certifying a Rule 54(b) judgment in the Microsoft v. Motorola case where he had issued a first of its kind RAND rate ruling on Motorola H.264 and 802.11 standard essential patents (SEPs) and sustained the jury verdict that Motorola breached its RAND obligations in offering a license to Microsoft. 

Please join the Essential Patent Blog and Kelley Drye & Warren LLP for a complimentary webinar on Thursday, Oct. 17 at 12:00pm Eastern to discuss the import of Judge Holderman’s recent RAND decision in the In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litigation.  Judge Holderman’s October 3rd decision is only the second U.S. district

Yesterday, Judge Robart issued an Order that denied Motorola’s motion to overturn the jury’s verdict that Motorola breached its RAND obligations in dealing with Microsoft on standard essential patents (SEPs) for IEEE 802.11 WiFi standards and ITU H.264 video compression standards. Judge Robart’s ruling here indicates that assessing compliance with a RAND obligation is a

gavel

This afternoon the RAND breach of contract case between Microsoft and Motorola went to the jury, and this evening — after just a few short hours of deliberation — the jury came back with its verdict.  According to Curtis Cartier (@curtis_cartier on Twitter), a freelance journalist who attended the trial, the jury found

Yesterday marked the start of the long-awaited Microsoft-Motorola RAND breach of contract jury trial, taking place before Judge James L. Robart in the Western District of Washington.  Over the next week or so, the jury will hear testimony on whether Motorola breached its IEEE- and ITU-related RAND obligations through its licensing negotiations and course of