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

We recently posted about defendant ViewSonic’s Answer in Zenith Elec. v. Viewsonic, which Answer included FRAND-related affirmative defenses and counterclaims against plaintiffs Zenith, Panasonic and Philips, as well as a FRAND-related Third-Party claim against MPEG LA.  On Monday, December 2, Curtis filed a motion to bifurcate the trial in the related case brought by Zenith

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

Qualcomm and Ericsson have filed amicus briefs in the appeal of Judge Crabb’s dismissal of Apple’s declaratory judgment action that sought a court-determined FRAND royalty rate under Motorola patents, where Judge Crabb dismissed the case after Apple would not agree to be bound by that FRAND determination (see our July post). Qualcomm and Ericsson

Yesterday the Fourth Circuit issued a decision in Jaffe v. Samsung, et al. regarding the preservation of existing U.S. patent licensing rights that various semiconductor companies had through cross-licensing with Qimonda AG, a German semiconductor manufacturer going through bankruptcy proceedings in Germany.  The decision does not state whether any standard essential patents (SEPs) were

A few months ago, we posted about patent infringement suits filed by Zenith Electronics (“Zenith”), Panasonic Corporation (“Panasonic”), U.S. Philips Corporation (“Philips”) and The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York (“Columbia”), licensors to the MPEG LA Advanced Television Systems Committee (“ATSC”) digital television patent pool, against electronics makers Curtis International (“Curtis”),

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

Yesterday Judge Whyte issued an Order with tentative rulings on motion’s in limine and Daubert motions for the upcoming Realtek v. LSI trial where the jury will determine (1) a RAND rate, (2) damages based on the court’s prior ruling that LSI breached its RAND obligations by seeking an exclusion order at the ITC before

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.