Assertion of standard-essential patents are all the rage at the ITC these days, with an upcoming trial on InterDigital’s claims (Inv. No. 337-TA-800), another recent complaint filed by InterDigital, dueling Ericsson-Samsung complaints, and the highly anticipated Final Determination in ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-794 involving Apple and Samsung due in March. And today, a company named Adaptix — a subsidiary of noted non-practicing entity Acacia Research — threw its hat into the ring, firing off a Section 337 complaint accusing Ericsson’s 4G LTE base stations of infringing U.S. Pat. No. 6,870,808, titled “Channel Allocation in Broadband Orthoganol Frequency-Division Multiple-Access/Space-Division Multiple-Access Networks.” But this might not be your typical standard-essential patent case — it has a couple of twists.
Continue Reading Acacia Research subsidiary Adaptix files new ITC complaint accusing Ericsson of infringing 4G LTE-essential patent
Earlier this month, InterDigital Communications filed a Section 337 complaint with the ITC, alleging that Samsung, Nokia, ZTE, and Huawei infringed several of InterDigital’s 3G and 4G-essential patents. As we noted in our earlier post on the matter, InterDigital included a statement regarding the public interest along with its complaint, attempting to preemptively assuage any public interest concerns the Commission may have due to the inclusion of standard-essential patents in the complaint. Over the past two weeks, though, the proposed respondents have each filed their own public interest statements with the ITC, asserting a number of reasons why the public interest might be adversely affected by the institution of an investigation based on InterDigital’s complaint.
Continue Reading InterDigital, Nokia, others dispute public interest implications of 3G/4G patent assertions
On January 17, 2013, Magistrate Judge John D. Love issued an order in Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., No 6:11-cv-492 (E.D. Tex.), granting the defendants’ motion to sever the case into several different actions. Judge Love found that infringement allegations stemming from the defendants’ compliance with the same technology standard was insufficient to warrant joinder. However, Judge Love found that in order to effectively manage the cases and preserve judicial resources, the cases would be consolidated for all pre-trial purposes except venue.
Continue Reading Compliance with same technology standard insufficient to warrant joinder of otherwise unrelated defendants (Network-1 Security Solutions v. Alcatel-Lucent)
Early in January we noted that a non-practicing entity named Steelhead Licensing had filed a number of complaints for patent infringement against various wireless device manufacturers and cellular carriers. Of particular note in those suits was that the patent at issue in all of the actions — U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,834, entitled “Mobile Radio Handover Initiation Determination” — was previously owned by British Telecom, is due to expire next month, and (according to Steelhead, apparently) is essential to various 3G and 4G wireless communications standards. On Friday, January 11, Steelhead expanded its assertion activities relating to the ‘834 patent, filing infringement actions against Acer, Amazon.com, Asustek, and Dell.
Continue Reading Steelhead Licensing expands cellular-essential patent assertion activities
Today the Federal Circuit issued a per curiam order (with Judge Newman dissenting) denying a combined petition for a panel rehearing and a rehearing en banc in InterDigital Communications v. International Trade Commission (No. 2010-1093) (en banc). However, along with the order, the panel also issued a new opinion to fully address arguments made by intervenor Nokia (the respondent in the underlying ITC case, Inv. No. 337-TA-613). In the opinion (written by Judge Bryson), the Court reiterates its prior conclusion (InterDigital Commc’ns v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012)) that non-practicing entities (NPEs) may satisfy the ITC’s domestic industry requirement through substantial investment in domestic licensing activities, without any need to prove that any licensed products are actually produced domestically.
Continue Reading Federal Circuit affirms broad ITC jurisdiction over Section 337 actions brought by NPEs (InterDigital v. ITC)
The DOJ and USPTO released a joint policy statement on January 8 regarding remedies for infringement of FRAND-encumbered SEPs, taking the position that injunctive relief is generally inappropriate for these patents. Microsoft praised the statement, and called on the FTC to consider strengthening its consent agreement with Google.
On Friday, January 4, 2013, a non-practicing entity named Steelhead Licensing LLC filed a litany of SEP-related lawsuits in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against various wireless device manufacturers and cellular carriers. Each of the entities is accused of infringing a single, soon-to-expire (on Feb. 13) patent — U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,834, entitled “Mobile Radio Handover Initiation Determination.”
Continue Reading Steelhead Licensing LLC files suit claiming wireless equipment makers and cellular carriers infringe cellular-essential patent