Applications in Internet Time LLC challenged the institution and subsequent invalidation of its patents US7356482 and US8484111 based on its contention that the filer, RPX Corp., was a real party in interest with Salesforce.com Inc. and thus subject to the one-year time bar for filing an IPR.   At the time of filing the IPRs,

Fees and exceptional status denied In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Judge Payne denied Nintendo’s motion to declare a case filed by Syncpoint Imaging exceptional or to grant attorneys’ fees. The motion stems from a case filed on September 18th, 2015 against Nintendo and Pixart Imaging Inc. The case was

In the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, the Court granted Apple’s motion to strike Uniloc’s infringement contentions because plaintiff failed to sufficiently identify the accused instrumentalities.  According to Judge Alsup, Uniloc “merely asserts in a footnote for each claim chart that the dozens of accused products ‘operate in substantially the same

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager jason@ipval.com On May 31st in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, Judge Sleet granted Bed Bath and Beyond’s Motion for attorneys’ fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. 285. (1:14-cv-00448) The case was filed on April 8th, 2014, roughly two and a half months before the Supreme Court’s

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager Contact: jason@ipval.com On April 28th in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, Judge Andrews denied Google’s 101 motion for summary judgment. The motion asserted that ART+COM Innovationpool’s geographical data display patent (RE44550 Method and device for pictorial representation of space-related data; Claim 1 of the ‘550 patent

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager Contact: jason@ipval.com On April 25th in Avago Technologies General IP (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. v. ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. (3-15-cv-04525)  the Court denied the defendant’s 101 motion to dismiss. The motion was heard by Judge Chen in the District Court for the Northern District of California and sought to dismiss the case

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager On March 22nd Judge Robinson in the District Court for the District of Delaware struck down three 101 based challenges. In the first case, Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Ricoh Americas Corporation et al, the Court denied Ricoh’s motion for judgement on the pleadings by finding that claims which apply

Recently, several news outlets have covered John Deere refusing to share their source code of their software in their new tractors with the farmers who purchase them.  Do not blame John Deere for this decision.  John Deere’s primary concern  is that ‘giving farmers free rein over the software would “make it possible for pirates, third-party

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager Contact: jason@ipval.com On May 20th, the Delaware District Court granted-in-part the plaintiff ART+COM’s motion in limine (cv-1:14-217-) to bar testimony by the defendant Google’s expert. The expert testimony was contradictory to the court’s claim construction order.  The Court concluded that “[i]t is improper for counsel to argue conflicting claim constructions to

Jason Bourgeois IP Portfolio Manager Contact: jason@ipval.com On March 20th in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Judge Gilstrap denied LG’s Motion for Summary Judgement of Invalidity in Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L v. LG Electronics, Inc.  This represents an important win for patents in the software space, particularly patents that improve