Truth and Fact About Inter Partes Review

(Alexandria, VA – Friday, April 18, 2014) Recently, attorneys at an American Bar Association Intellectual Property Law Conference ran amuck, fear-mongering about the Patent Trial and Review Board (PTAB). Attorneys, legal bloggers, and others around the country are and have been claiming that Inter Partes Review has proven to be more popular and more effective at invalidating patents than anyone originally expected. The current rumored figure is that 95% of patent claims brought before the...

Shareholders Sue Marvell for $1.5B Patent Loss

(April 7, 2014 – San Francisco, California): Shareholders—represented by Lee Voss—have sued as individuals the CEO Sehat Sutardja, his wife, and the board of Marvell Technology Group Ltd. for failure to license a patent which Marvell knowingly infringed. In 2012 a Pennsylvania jury entered a verdict for the inventor of the patent in the amount of $1.17 billion. The Honorable Nora Barry Fischer affirmed the jury’s verdict which was increased in March by $366 million bringing the total...

EU Corporation Ordered to Produce Redacted Docs by End of Day

Photo by opensourceway / CC BY-SA (Wednesday, March 19, 2014 – Marshall, Texas): Cognitec Systems GmbH, based in Dresden, has been ordered to reproduce unredacted versions of its jurisdictional discovery. Initially, Cognitec Systems GmbH produced a set of heavily-redacted documents and justified the redactions by citing, among other reasons, European discovery limitations. However, after a Rule CV-26(e) “hotline” hearing with Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne, Cognitec Systems GmbH was...

Google to Pay $85,000,000 for Infringement

(Marshall, Texas – Wednesday, March 19, 2014) – In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:13-cv-416-JRG, an East Texas jury entered a damages verdict against Google Inc. for $85,000,000 for patent infringement. Many of the defendants, including Microsoft, chose to settle. Google, however, proceeded to trial, and on January 18, 2014 an East Texas jury entered a verdict against Google finding that it infringed two patents (7,035,914 and 6,021,433) and that the two patents were valid....

Apple Denied Inter Partes Review

(Alexandria, VA – Wednesday, February 12, 2014) The Patent Trial and Appeal Board refused to apply Apple, Inc’s reading of the one year time limitation on inter partes review. See 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). Virnetx, Inc. and Science Application International Corporation commenced patent infringement actions against Apple, Inc. in 2010 and 2012 for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,502,135 in the Eastern District of Texas. During the 2010 litigation, an Eastern District of Texas jury found the...

Google is Going to Pay For Its Patent Infringement

(Federal Courthouse in Marshall, Texas. Photo by Jay Carriker.) (Marshall, Texas – Monday, February 10, 2014) The Honorable Rodney Gilstrap entered an order for entry of partial judgment for patent infringement today against Google in SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:11-cv-416-JRG. On January 18, 2014, an East Texas jury found Google guilty of patent infringement but could not reach a decision on the amount of damages. Google’s counsel responded by moving the Court for a new...

Australia’s National Science Agency Seeks $31 Million from Cisco

(Thursday, January 23, 2014 – Tyler, Texas) Counsel for the Australian government’s science agency—Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)—squared off with Counsel for Cisco Systems, Inc. during a final pre-trial conference before Chief Judge Leonard Davis. CSIRO’s pioneering patent combines several existing technologies in a unique way to create the wireless LAN technology underlying the IEEE 802.11 a, g and n standards, often referred to as Wi-Fi.  To...

Google Found Guilty of Patent Infringement

(Marshall, Texas – Tuesday, January 18, 2014) Earlier today, a jury returned a verdict against Google Inc. for patent infringement in SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:11-cv-416-JRG. SimpleAir commenced this action on September 15, 2011 for infringement of two patents: 7,035,914 and 6,021,433 both titled “System and Method for Transmission of Data.” Initially, Microsoft and Google were both parties to this action; Microsoft settled with SimpleAir and entered into a licensing...

Judge Bryson Appointed to Assist Eastern District

(Monday, December 16, 2013 – Marshall, Texas) While Congress debates the reformation of patent litigation, U.S. Circuit Judge William C. Bryson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is back, riding the circuit in the Eastern District of Texas. See Order on U.S. Cir. Judge Bryson, Dec. 16, 2013. Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court has approved the intercircuit assignment. The general purpose of intercircuit appointments is to ease heavily burdened dockets. See...

Tyler, TX Jury Protects Local Texan’s Patent Rights Against Foreign and Domestic Infringers

(Friday, November 22, 2013 – Tyler, Texas): A jury of five (5) women and two (2) men from Tyler, Texas returned a verdict for Houston-based L.C. Eldridge Sales Co., Ltd. and Leseman Davis LLC (“Eldridge”) for the full amount Plaintiff requested in L.C. Eldridge Sales Co., Ltd., et al., v. Jurong Shipyard Pte., Ltd., et al., 6:11-cv-599-MHS. Eldridge accused international defendants of copying its oil-rig exhaust system covered by U.S. patent 7,707,828 and manufacturing for, selling...

Court Denies Government’s Motion to Stay

(Tuesday, November 19, 2013 – Washington, D.C.): The Court of Federal Claims came down with an order denying the U.S. Government’s motion to stay Blue Spike, LLC v. the United States, Case No. 13-419-C. Plaintiff brought suit against the U.S. under Title 28 USC §1498 for the unlicensed procurement, manufacture, and use of patented inventions as claimed in U.S. Patent Numbers 8,214,175, 7,949,494, 7,660,700, and 7,346,472. See Dkt. 010, Blue Spike’s First Amended Complaint. In...

Schneider Denies Motion to Dismiss Based on Personal Jurisdiction

(Thursday, October 31, 2013 – Tyler, Texas): Judge Schneider denied a motion to dismiss based on a lack of personal jurisdiction filed by Atwood Oceanics Global Limited (AOGL) in Eldridge Sales Co., Ltd., et al., v. Azen Manufacturing PTE., LTD., et al., 6:11-cv-00599, Dkt. No. 279.  While Schneider agreed with defendant that it could not exercise “general jurisdiction” over it, the Court could exercise “specific jurisdiction.” Finding that the Defendant “us[ed] allegedly...

Updates in TracBeam v AT&T Mobility

(Thursday, October 24, 2013 – Tyler, Texas): With jury selection scheduled for November 4, 2013 in TracBeam, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, today Chief Judge Leonard Davis held a hearing on Defendant AT&T Mobility’s motion for a continuance. For AT&T, Bryant Carroll Boren, Jr. of Baker and Botts’ Palo Alto Office, argued that TracBeam’s untimely supplemental expert reports presented an entirely new theory of infringement and presented a significant prejudice to AT&T.  He...

Blue Spike Settles with Yahoo! and NEC.

(Monday, March 4, 2013 – Tyler, TX): Blue Spike, LLC continues to make its mark after inking two favorable settlements with major corporations. Yahoo! and NEC Corporation, listed among the Fortune 500 and Global Fortune 500 respectively, recently agreed to settle the software company’s claims they infringed Blue Spike’s state-of-the-art abstraction patents. Blue Spike’s founder, Scott Moskowitz, is pleased with the results. Moskowitz is CEO of the Texas-based software company and the...

Garteiser Honea Wins Battle to Hold Russian Patent Infringer Accountable – In Texas.

(Monday, January 14, 2013 – Marshall, Texas): Software and service provider Blue Spike, LLC successfully defended a motion to quash brought by a Russian Biometric Company, Biolink Solutions Ltd. To save its client money, Garteiser Honea researched and discovered that it could accomplish service on the company through the Texas Secretary of State. After all, the company was alleged to be selling products in Texas, and these products collect personal data on Texas residents. Here, Garteiser...

Garteiser Honea Defeats Perkins Coie in Heated Arbitration.

(Saturday, November 3, 2012 – Palo Alto, CA)  An arbitrator made a determination in a contractual dispute between Garteiser Honea’s client, Exygy, LLC, and GreatNonprofits, represented by Perkins Coie.  The verdict: it’s another win for a Garteiser Honea client. The dispute arose over failure to pay on a contract for custom software development.  When GreatNonprofit’s CEO, a graduate of Harvard Law and former member of the California Bar, called in a favor with internationally...

Artist Rides Off Satisfied with Harley-Davidson Resolution

(Sunday, October 21, 2012 – Milwaukee, WI) Just six months after free-lance artist Wayne Peterson filed a copyright infringement suit against motorcycle giant Harley-Davidson, a resolution has been reached to Peterson’s satisfaction. In Peterson’s lawsuit he contended that in 1985, Harley commissioned him to create a graphic work—the famous “Live To Ride” logo—for a one-time one-run basis on carburetor covers.  In 1991, Harley commissioned another work from Peterson for its...

Artist Successful At Defeating Harley-Davidson’s Attempt to Dismiss IP Case

(Thursday, August 2, 2012 – Milwaukee, WI) As reported in IPLAW360 and dealernews.com, represented by Garteiser Honea, free-lance artist Wayne Peterson successfully defeated a motion to dismiss filed in a copyright infringement lawsuit against motorcycle giant Harley-Davidson Motor Company, who was represented by Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP and Bryan Cave LLP.   See Peterson v. Harley-Davidson Inc., et al, Case No. 2:12-cv-00381, Dkt 16 (E.D. WI July 31,...

Lawsuit filed against Harley-Davidson for Copyright Infringement

(Wednesday, April 25, 2012  – Milwaukee, WI) Artist Wayne Peterson filed a lawsuit today against Harley Davidson for Copyright Infringement.  See 001 Complaint for Copyright Infringement against Harley Davidson. Peterson, who formerly did business as Peterson Studios Ltd., is a freelance commercial artist. From the mid 1970s to the mid 2000s, Harley-Davidson commissioned Peterson, as an independent contractor, to produce more than 600 pictorial, graphic, sculptural, and other works....

Chris Johns Wins Complete Defense Verdict In Securities Litigation

(Sunday, March 25, 2012  – Austin, TX) Garteiser Honea’s litigator Christopher Johns won a complete defense verdict for Noble Capital in a multi-million-dollar securities fraud case. The jury found Noble not liable in a jury trial held before the Honorable Sam Sparks in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The Court upheld the jury’s verdict and entered judgment in favor of the Defendants. In the case, three New York businessmen brought...

Garteiser Honea Wins Another IP Litigation Victory

(Friday, February 24, 2012 – Marin County, CA) Garteiser Honea wins another IP Litigation victory. This time a previous CEO of a software start-up claimed that Garteiser Honea’s client, a senior software programmer, had converted the plaintiff’s alleged intellectual property into his own. Plaintiff moved for a Preliminary Injunction. Garteiser Honea wrote an excellent opposition to the Preliminary Injunction and simultaneously filed a demurrer. The Preliminary Injunction was...

Just Days Before A TRO Hearing, Garteiser Honea Steps In To Defeat It

(Wednesday, January 11, 2012  – Marin County, CA) Plaintiff was moving for Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to obtain an injunction against a software developer wrongly accused of stealing trade secrets. The sophisticated programmer took no chances and hired Garteiser Honea to defend him at the TRO hearing. Garteiser Honea swung into action and defeated the TRO with just five (5) days to prepare. “Our practice is identical to what we were doing at much larger litigation...

California on Side of Sellers

(Wednesday, November 16, 2011 – Marin County, CA) CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURES CONTINUE TO CURTAIL LIABILITY OF DISTRESSED SELLERS IN SHORT SALE PROCEEDINGS — DO THEIR EFFORTS HELP YOU? There is a wide range of confusion swirling about with the recent enactment of several key pieces of legislation surrounding a seller’s resulting liability after they have completed a “short sale” of their property due to financial distress. In the 1930s California Civil Code of Procedure (CCP) 580b was...

Business Method Patents

(Wednesday, November 9, 2011 – Marin County, CA) Definition: Business method patents are a class of patents which disclose and claim new methods of doing business. This includes new types of e-commerce, insurance, banking, tax compliance etc. Business method patents are a relatively new species of patent and there have been several reviews investigating the appropriateness of patenting business methods. Nonetheless, they have become important assets for both independent inventors and major...