- A couple weeks back, we noted a bid by Cisco, Motorola Solutions, and NETGEAR to expedite an appeal of their unsuccessful unfair competition claims against non-practicing entity Innovatio IP Ventures LLC. At a status hearing yesterday, however, Chief Judge James F. Holderman of the Northern District of Illinois denied the parties’ motion for entry of final judgment — so the WiFi suppliers will have to wait a bit longer to see if they can revive these claims.
- Cisco, Motorola Solutions, and NETGEAR aren’t the only ones advocating using unfair competition/antitrust claims to fight NPEs. Over at Patent Progress, Brendan Coffman proposes that the Federal Trade Commission utilize Section 6(b) of the FTC Act to conduct a study on the business models of non-practicing entities. Google, BlackBerry, Red Hat, and Earthlink submitted joint comments to the FTC and DOJ that also encouraged a 6(b) study (as well as the use of other antitrust tools). Links to the dozens of other comments submitted to the FTC and DOJ in response to their December 2012 Patent Assertion Entities Workshop — many of which call for increased antitrust scrutiny of NPEs – can be found here.
- It’s not uncommon for universities to assert patent infringement claims against operating companies. Recently, Carnegie Mellon won a $1B+ infringement verdict against Marvell Semiconductor. It seems that at least one operating company has found an interesting way of fighting back. In 2011, the University of Illinois sued Micron Technology for patent infringement over certain semiconductor-related patents. As Patently-O’s Dennis Crouch explains, Micron has now told the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign that it will no longer recruit UIUC students while Micron is being sued for patent infringement by the university.
In recent posts, we covered the briefs submitted by Samsung and Apple and the ITC Staff in response to the U.S. International Trade Commission’s request for additional briefing in Inv. No. 337-TA-794. We noted that several other parties also submitted responses, offering their views on how an exclusion order in this case might affect the public interest. These parties include:
- Cisco, Hewlett-Packard, and Micron Technology
- The Retail Industry Leaders’ Association
- The Business Software Alliance
- The Association for Competitive Technology
Each of these parties warns the ITC that allowing exclusion orders for FRAND-pledged standard-essential patents may have adverse effects on U.S. consumers and the U.S. economy, particularly future standards-setting activity. A brief summary of these public interest submissions is after the jump. Continue reading
- Patent Peace in South Korea: Samsung and LG Electronics have settled their contentious patent and trade secret dispute relating to organic light-emitting diode (OLED) technology that is widely used in flat-panel televisions and computer monitors. (via CNET)
- For the second time in a week, the Federal Circuit denied Apple’s request for an en banc hearing (this time an initial hearing of Apple’s appeal of Judge Lucy Koh’s denial of a permanent injunction against Samsung). However, the court did note that “a party” (i.e., Apple) could argue to the panel about the need to overrule precedent or any other bases to hear the appeal en banc.
- Apple’s “slide-to-unlock” feature patents have been well-documented (and well-litigated). But as Dennis Crouch at Patently-O notes, Micron Technology just received a patent for a slide to unlock feature that dates — could this add another wrinkle to the smartphone wars?