ITC LogoWe’ve previously covered the bilateral standard-essential patent battle brewing between Ericsson and Samsung in the U.S. International Trade Commission (as well as the Eastern District of Texas).  The ITC has instituted two investigations surrounding the parties’ claims: Inv. No. 337-TA-862 (based on Ericsson’s complaint) and Inv. No. 337-TA-866 (based on Samsung’s complaint).  Yesterday, Samsung filed the public version of its Response to the Complaint and Notice of Investigation (essentially, an answer to Ericsson’s complaint) in the -862 investigation.  Below is an overview of this filing, in which (surprise!) F/RAND-related issues and defenses have a starring role.
Continue Reading

On Tues., Nov. 20, 2012, in Ritz Camera & Image, LLC v. SanDisk Corp., No. 2012-1183, the Federal Circuit (Bryson, Dyk, and Moore) broadened the ability of direct purchasers of patented products to bring claims of antitrust violations under the Walker Process theory of liability (as set forth in the Supreme Court’s opinion inWalker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chem. Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965)).  The Court found that a direct purchaser of patented goods has antitrust standing and is therefore not categorically precluded from bringing aWalker Process antitrust claim against the patent owner, even when the direct purchaser would not have standing to bring a declaratory judgment claim against the patent owner under the patent laws.
Continue Reading