No patent attorney questions NTP patents?
It appears that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is getting around to the NTP v. RIM case and will examine a pro-NTP decision rendered in the ED Va. Oral arguments in the appeal had been heard June 7, 2004. In a trial in November 2002, the jury took only five hours to negate RIM’s defense of patent invalidity and to find RIM guilty of infringement of five NTP patents, handing down a $23 million damages verdict. [The question of infringement was decided by the jury; the judge determines whether or not an injunction is imposed. On the case, see 2003 WL 23100881 ]
A quote in a CNET news article by Richard Shim caught my eye:
-->"We have yet to find a legal expert or independent third party outside of RIMM that is familiar with the NTP case and who thinks that RIMM will come out on top," Pablo Perez-Fernandez, an analyst with investment bank Standford Group, wrote in a research note last week. "Our own review of court proceedings and the patents involved in the case suggest that NTP has a very strong position." <--
The CNET article also mentioned that RIM had filed a re-examination request. [The PTO approved a director-initiated reexamination on December 26, 2002 and announced the reexamination in January 2003. Director-ordered reexaminations happened with the Eolas patent and with the Katz patents. Four of the five litigated patents (in the jury verdict of November 2002) are part of the re-examination. Overall, there are five patents being re-examined: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,625,670; 5,631,946; 5,819,172; 6,067,451 and 6,317,592. Because one patent of the jury verdict is not being re-examined, an adverse result to NTP in the re-examination would not necessarily change the outcome. NTP’s counsel, James Wallace, has downplayed the significance of the Patent Office’s decision by noting that NTP’s oldest patent is not part of the reexamination process. "The other four [patents] could go down the tubes, and we’d be fine based on that patent," according to Mr. Wallace. ]
Further, the US Congress made some comments about the case. The Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives, James Eagen III, sent a letter to counsel for both parties advocating a resolution to the patent dispute that did not halt "Blackberry" operations. In this letter, Eagan wrote that "Not only do members and staff depend on the Blackberry service for daily communications and business operations, the House relies on the device for notifications and communications in emergency situations." By one report, the House has issued almost 3000 "Blackberry" devices to House members and staff and invested in over $6 million in the supporting proprietary technology. Also at issue: "On September 11th, [Blackberrys] were the only thing that worked. Pay phones and cell phones were out." He added, "In the interest of national security, we just can't have people's Blackberrys turning off."
Canada's Research In Motion (RIM) makes wireless products for the mobile personal communication market, including the BlackBerry wireless e-mail service, an interactive pager, wireless PC card adapters and embedded radio modems.
A quote in a CNET news article by Richard Shim caught my eye:
-->"We have yet to find a legal expert or independent third party outside of RIMM that is familiar with the NTP case and who thinks that RIMM will come out on top," Pablo Perez-Fernandez, an analyst with investment bank Standford Group, wrote in a research note last week. "Our own review of court proceedings and the patents involved in the case suggest that NTP has a very strong position." <--
The CNET article also mentioned that RIM had filed a re-examination request. [The PTO approved a director-initiated reexamination on December 26, 2002 and announced the reexamination in January 2003. Director-ordered reexaminations happened with the Eolas patent and with the Katz patents. Four of the five litigated patents (in the jury verdict of November 2002) are part of the re-examination. Overall, there are five patents being re-examined: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,625,670; 5,631,946; 5,819,172; 6,067,451 and 6,317,592. Because one patent of the jury verdict is not being re-examined, an adverse result to NTP in the re-examination would not necessarily change the outcome. NTP’s counsel, James Wallace, has downplayed the significance of the Patent Office’s decision by noting that NTP’s oldest patent is not part of the reexamination process. "The other four [patents] could go down the tubes, and we’d be fine based on that patent," according to Mr. Wallace. ]
Further, the US Congress made some comments about the case. The Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives, James Eagen III, sent a letter to counsel for both parties advocating a resolution to the patent dispute that did not halt "Blackberry" operations. In this letter, Eagan wrote that "Not only do members and staff depend on the Blackberry service for daily communications and business operations, the House relies on the device for notifications and communications in emergency situations." By one report, the House has issued almost 3000 "Blackberry" devices to House members and staff and invested in over $6 million in the supporting proprietary technology. Also at issue: "On September 11th, [Blackberrys] were the only thing that worked. Pay phones and cell phones were out." He added, "In the interest of national security, we just can't have people's Blackberrys turning off."
Canada's Research In Motion (RIM) makes wireless products for the mobile personal communication market, including the BlackBerry wireless e-mail service, an interactive pager, wireless PC card adapters and embedded radio modems.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home