Blog

By Alex Poltorak (March 31, 2009)

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee held an executive session on the S.515 bill a.k.a. The Patent Reform Act of 2009. The Senators on both side of the aisle who were most active in this legislative initiative, Pat Leahy (D-VT), Arlen Specter (R-PA), and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), agreed today on a compromise on most contentious feature of the bill. The compromise affects the following provisions of the bill:

(March 30, 2009) Microsoft and TomTom, the Amsterdam-based GPS manufacturer, have settled a patent infringement lawsuit concerning 8 Microsoft patents that allow global positioning systems (GPS) to connect to the Internet, run multiple applications and provide a smooth navigation experience.

A previous blog post addressed infringement of method claims, specifically the question whether all the steps must be performed by a single party (the “slimeball”) for infringement to occur (the reader may relax, this is not a quiz). The C.A.F.C. has now taken up the question whether the foreign use of a patented process is an infringement. Cardiac Pacemakers Inc. et al. v. St. Jude Medical Inc. et al.

A patent portfolio is like a garden – if it is to produce a bountiful crop, the plants must be carefully selected, planted and cultivated. The gardener must periodically till the garden to remove weeds which would otherwise take nutrients from more desirable plants. Finally, the successful gardener protects his crops from predatory animals and insect pests, and sells those crops which no longer meet his tastes.

A “process” or “method” patent is one directed (not surprisingly) to a process or method for doing something. The claims of such a patent set forth a number (a “plurality” in lawyerspeak) of steps. Infringement of a process or method occurs when a single party (known as an infringer or “slimeball”), without permission, performs all of the steps of at least one of the claims of the patent. The question remains, however, whether the patent is infringed when some of the steps are performed by one party and the remaining steps are performed by another party.

By Alex Poltorak

Last Tuesday, March 3, 2009, Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), and Representatives John Conyers (D-Michigan) and Lamar Smith (R-Texas) have introduced to the Senate (S. 515) and the House (H.R. 1260) almost identical bills aimed at reforming our patent system. These bills, collectively referred to as the Patent Reform Act of 2009, as expected, are very similar to S. 1145 and H.R. 1908 of the Patent Reform Act of 2007 that failed in the last Congress.

Vision-1 LLC, a company formed by two inventors named Nancy L. Anderson and Lois J. Pannkuk, first filed suit against Wal-Mart Stores LLC in October 2008. At issue is their patent, US Patent No.

Intel and Dell are in a trademark battle with Psion over Psion's trademark on the term "netbook," which Psion trademarked for use with a line of notebook computers that were last sold in 2003. Intel and Dell argue that Psion has lost its trademark through years of disuse and that in the interim, the public has adopted the term "netbook" as a generic term to describe "extensions of the notebook category, smaller computers purpose-built for mobile Internet access."

The US District Court for the Central District of California has thrown out Gibson's lawsuit against Activision Blizzard (ActiBlizz), the maker of Guitar Hero.

Gibson filed its lawsuit in March 2008, alleging that Activision infringes Gibson's patent for devices with which a "musician can simulate participation in a concert by playing a musical instrument and wearing a head-mounted 3D display that includes stereo speakers."

Apple has been hit with another lawsuit over its iPhone, despite having 200 patents on the iPhone Multi-touch interface and other iPhone technology. It just goes to show that you can never spend too much time researching prior art.

In September 2008, the story broke that one of the world's most famous trade secrets was moved to a secure location while the security as corporate headquarters was beefed up. Placed in a locked briefcase marked "Top Secret" and handcuffed to a security expert, the document went for a ride in an armored car accompanied by bodyguards and an escort of off-duty police officers.

As CNET reported on February 10, Microsoft has just been issued its 10,000th patent. But another CNET blogger pointed out that Microsoft has "not much to show" for its 10,000 patents, which he contends were obtained as protection against lawsuits rather than ways of pushing the company's product lines forward. Microsoft still receives most of its revenue from Office and Windows products.

Shepard Fairey used a little-known photograph of Barack Obama, taken in 2006 at the National Press Club by Associated Press photographer Mannie Garcia, and made it into an iconic representation of the man that many voters saw as an almost messianic figure. But was Fairey's use of the photo "fair use"? Legal experts at Stanford Law School think so.

Bloggers are abuzz with speculation about whether Apple is planning to sue Palm. At issue is Palm's new Pre smartphone, which has a multi-touch screen that, like the iPhone, can be controlled using a two-finger pinch. Apple has applied for a patent to cover the touch-screen technology that multi-touch screens use.

(January 21, 2009) According to MSNBC, Judge Robert Smith of the Mobile (Alabama) County Circuit has upheld a $192M jury verdict against chemical companies Ineos Americas LLC and Germany-based Ineos Phenol. The lawsuit was filed in 2006 by chemist Sven Peter Mannsfeld, now 72, a German immigrant who worked at Degussa Corp. for 30 years. Mannsfeld claimed that Ineos stole his hazardous waste recycling idea and patented it as their own -- an allegation that was satisfactorily proven in court.

(January 11, 2009) According to a report on Reuters, a federal judge has ruled that Rambus' actions in destroying documents from 1998-1999 was “obstructive at best, misleading at worst,” and said that Rambus could not enforce its patents against memory chip maker Micron Technology.

It is a defense to a claim of patent infringement that the patent-in-suit is invalid. For this reason, defendants are constantly exercising their imaginations in the search for new grounds for holding a patent invalid. Recently, one such defendant succeeded in killing a patent on the grounds that it was based upon an application which had been filed one day too late and then revived. The defendant (Aristocrat v. IGT) argued that revival was only allowed in cases of “unavoidable” delay, while the applicant could only show its delay was “unintentional” – a lower standard.

(12/18/08) - Ten years after Jacob Krippelz, Sr. first sued Ford Motor Co. for patent infringement, a Federal jury awarded the independent inventor a $23 million verdict. At issue was Krippelz' 1991 patent on an automotive lighting system used in exterior rear view mirrors.

(12/17/08) - Nintendo of America and Nyko Technologies, Inc. announced that they have settled a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Nintendo, which held that Nyko's Kama wireless controller for the Nintendo Wii gaming system infringed on Nintendo's patent for its wired Nunchuk controller.

Nyko will continue to sell a redesigned version of the Kama controller under the agreement.

(12/15/08) - Energizer Holdings Inc. dropped its patent infringement suit against Spectrum Brands, as the two companies settled the case earlier this month. The suit, filed in July, alleged that Spectrum infringed Energizer's patent on lithium batteries by importing lithium batteries from China and selling them under the Rayovac brand.