Retailers Escalate Fight with Round Rock Research on RFID Patents
Scott Daniels | February 2, 2012
This past December Round Rock Research launched a barrage of complaints against a who’s-who of American retailers — American Apparel, Dole Food, Fruit of the Loom, Hanesbrands, J.C. Penney, Macy’s, PepsiCo., The Gap and VF Corporation – accusing them of using ultra high frequency RFID tags and readers that infringe five patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,500,650, 5,627,544, 5,974,078, 6,459,726 and Re 41,531.
On Tuesday, reexamination requests were filed anonymously against the ‘650, ‘544, ‘726 and ‘531 patents, undoubtedly by one or more of the accused retailers. A request had already been filed and granted against the ‘078 patent.
The case will be interesting to follow if only for ubiquity of the accused tags and readers – J.C. Penney alone is believed to use them in 1,100 stores.
eBay Attack on Purple Leaf Electronic Transaction Patent among the Reexamination Requests filed Week of January 23, 2012
Scott Daniels | January 30, 2012
Last week eBay replied to an infringement action filed against it in the Eastern District of Texas by Purple Leaf by seeking reexamination of the patent-in-suit (see inter partes Request No. (2)). The Purple Leaf patent claims a process for conducting electronic transactions and making payments over the Internet.
The winner for the most reexamination requests filed was Nanosolar that challenged three Solannex patents related to photovoltaic cells (see ex parte Request Nos. (5), (6) & (7)). The companies are in litigation over these patents in the Northern District of California.
Ex parte Request No. (4), involving U.S. Patent No. 5,337,753 owned by Biosig Instruments and claiming a heart rate monitor, is interesting in that it expressly calls for the PTO to “clarify the record” regarding the meaning of the claims. The Request notes the ‘753 patent has been through an earlier reexamination, but that the trial judge in a pending infringement action has refused to rely on the patentee’s assertions in that earlier reexamination because they are “ambiguous.”
Challenge to Round Rock RFID Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of January 16, 2012
Scott Daniels | January 23, 2012
In September an unidentified party requested reexamination of four RFID patents owned by Round Rock Research. Last Tuesday, reexamination was requested of another Round Rock RFID patent, Reissue 41,562, again by an anonymous party (see ex parte Request No. (1)).
Traditionally, reexamination has been requested of a substantial number electronics and Internet patents, but it is much less common for pharmaceutical and medical delivery patents. In recent weeks, though, that pattern seems to be changing, with more reexamination requests directed to pharmaceutical and medical delivery patents. That trend continued last week when reexamination was requested for two patents owned by Monosol claiming film to be used in drug delivery systems (see ex parte Request Nos. (3) & (4)). Monosol has sued BioDelivery in New Jersey for infringement of the patents.
HTC Attack on FlashPoint Image Capture Patent among the Reexamination Requests filed Week of January 9, 2012
Scott Daniels | January 17, 2012
HTC has requested reexamination of FlashPoint Technology’s U.S. Patent No. 6,278,447 for video interface system (see ex parte Request No. (9)). The ‘447 patent has survived two earlier ex parte reexaminations without cancelation or amendment of claims.
Reexamination was requested of another MobileMedia Ideas patent for data storage, U.S. Patent No. 5,977,887 (see ex parte Request No. (2)). The PTO records do not indicate the identity of the requester, but it might be HTC.
Attacks on Two MobileMedia Ideas Patents for Communication Devices, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of January 2, 2012
Scott Daniels | January 9, 2012
Reexamination was requested of two communications device patents owned by MobileMedia Ideas (see ex parte Request Nos. (2) & (3)). MobileMedia, that describes itself as “patent portfolio licensor of inventions adopted by manufacturers of smart phones, mobile phones and other portable devices including personal computers, laptops, netbooks, personal media players, e-book readers, cameras and hand-held game consoles,” obtained one of the patents from Sony and the other from Nokia. MobileMedia has sued HTC in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of the two patents, plus nine other patents. What stake if any Sony or Nokia has in the litigation is unknown. It is not immediately clear who filed the requests, but it is likely HTC.
CBS Interactive requested reexamination of a paging system patent owned by Helferich Patent Licensing (see inter partes Request No. (2)). Helferich had sued CBS and a number of other media companies in Illinois and Arizona for infringement. CBS had requested reexamination of another Helferich patent at the end of December.
Google and Yahoo! Attack on Browser Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 26, 2011
Scott Daniels | January 3, 2012
Google and Yahoo! have requested reexamination of a browser patent owned by Interval Licensing (see ex parte Request No. (3)). Interval had already sued the two companies for infringement of the patent. Google and Microsoft have requested reexamination of a patent owned by Paid Search Engine Tools for a bid management system (see inter partes Request No. (1)). As above, there is a pending infringement action regarding the patent in question. This approach of two or more companies jointly requesting reexamination is becoming more common.
Ex parte reexamination was requested by an unidentified party against Intellect Wireless’ U.S. Patent No. 7,266,186 claiming a paging receiver and system (see ex parte Request No. (1)). Intellect Wireless has sued a number of companies – among them HTC, RIM, AT&T Mobility — for infringement of the ‘186 patent, as well as for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,310,416. HTC America filed inter partes requests against the ‘186 patent at the beginning of October, and against the ‘416 patent in November. Non-final rejections have already issued against both Intellect Wireless patents. According to HTC, the infringement action has been “effectively stayed pending a ruling” on HTC’s motion for summary judgment of inequitable conduct. The various reexaminations might have an impact on HTC’s inequitable conduct allegations.
Read More/続きを読む
Challenges to Five Ronald Katz Telephone Patents, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 19, 2011
Scott Daniels | December 27, 2011
Perhaps more than any other inventor, Ronald Katz has been the target of rivals’ requests for reexamination. This was certainly true this past week, when requests were filed against five Katz telephone system patents (see ex parte Request Nos. (1), (3) to (5) & (10)). According to Patent Office assignment records, the five patents are owned by General Electric Capital.
Vicor requested reexamination of a SynQor power converter patent (see inter partes Request No. (5)). Synqor has sued a number of companies, including Ericsson, for infringement of that patent.
And Ford has requested reexamination of a GM patent for a car body structure, specifically a roof panel-side frame construction (see inter partes Request No. (3)).
Read More/続きを読む
Cisco Challenge to Two VirnetX Network Patents, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 12, 2011
Scott Daniels | December 20, 2011
VirnetX, having long ago vanquished Microsoft, is now in a difficult infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas against Cisco and a number of other network-makers. Last week Cisco requested reexamination of two VirnetX patents (see inter partes Request Nos. (3) & (8) – U.S. Patent Nos. 7,418,504 and 7,921,211.
Knowles Electronics is involved in a rather complicated litigation position. First, it sued Analog Devices in Illinois for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,439,616 and 7,537,964, and then, at the beginning of this month, it filed an ITC Complaint against Analog Devices, Amkor and Avnet for infringement of the ‘964 patent, plus infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,018,049. Reexamination requests were filed last week against the ‘964 and ‘049 patent (see inter partes Request Nos. (1) & (2)), and reexamination was requested against the ‘616 patent last May. This multi-front dispute creates another opportunity for interaction between the respective forums.
Reexamination is rarely requested for design patents, but two requests were filed last week (see ex parte Request Nos. (7) & (17)). Challenges by reexamination to design patents seem to do much better than those in District Court.
Volkswagen requested reexamination of a GPS patent owned by Beacon Navigation who has sued a number of automakers for infringement of the patent (see inter partes Request No. (4)).
LG Attack on Whirlpool Refrigerator Patent, among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of December 5, 2011
Scott Daniels | December 12, 2011
LG has requested reexamination of Whirlpool patent for icemakers (see inter partes Request No. 3). The Whirlpool patent is already the subject of a declaratory judgment action in Delaware, also filed by LG. The two companies have been involved in a series of disputes over refrigerator patents.
Hitachi Koki has requested reexamination of seven Milwaukee Electronic Tool patents for lithium battery packs for hand-tools (see inter partes Request Nos. (8) to (10) and ex parte Request Nos. (5) to (8)). Milwaukee has sued Hitachi in the Eastern District of Wisconsin for infringing the patents
Reexamination was also requested for two Ronald Katz patents for a telephonic lottery (see ex parte Request Nos. (3) & (4). Katz patents have been the subject of quite a number of reexaminations over the years.
Attack on Lam Research Plasma Processing Patent, Among the Reexamination Requests Filed Week of November 28, 2011
Scott Daniels | December 5, 2011
Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment has requested reexamination of Lam Research’s U.S. Patent No. 5,998,932 related to plasma processing equipment (see ex parte Request No. (6)). Lam has sued AMFE for infringement of the Taiwanese counter-part patent and might soon sue in the United States for infringement of the ‘932 patent.
Reexamination was also requested for a Xerox patent (see inter partes Request No. (5)), but the identity of the requester is not shown in the PTO records.
