Aruba Networks, Inc. (ARUN), a provider of wireless LANs and secure mobility solutions, said it filed a patent infringement countersuit against Motorola, Inc. (MOT: News ), Symbol and Wireless Valley, concerning Motorola's infringement of two Aruba patents related to managing wireless computer networks and network security.
The first asserted patent was assumed by Sunnyvale, California-based Aruba in March 2008 as part of its acquisition of AirWave Wireless, Inc. The second asserted patent was issued to Aruba in May 2008. Aruba is seeking a permanent injunction against use of its patented technologies, as well as monetary damages for infringing use.
Aruba's countersuit follows a decision by the United States Patent and Trademark Office to re-examine all four patents that Motorola -- through its Symbol Technologies and Wireless Valley subsidiaries -- is asserting against Aruba in a lawsuit filed in the Federal district court in Delaware. The Patent Office found that the prior art submitted by Aruba raises a substantial new question about the patentability of the claims of all four of Motorola's patents.
According to Keerti Melkote, Aruba's co-founder and chief technology officer, "We asserted our patents following an unsuccessful attempt to negotiate a license. We simply cannot stand by while Motorola, and its Symbol and Wireless Valley subsidiaries, continue to violate our intellectual property. We will defend our intellectual property in court and we fully expect to win in that forum, just as we have in the market."
ARUN closed Tuesday's regular trade at $5.29, up $0.16 or 3.12%, on 843,210 shares.
by RTT Staff Writer
Showing posts with label Patent Infringement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patent Infringement. Show all posts
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Two New Patents Are Added in Nextec's Patent Infringement Suit Against Hallwood Group's Wholly Owned Subsidiary, Brookwood Companies, Inc.; Nextec Rep
Sep 18, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- On August 2, 2007 Nextec Applications Inc. ("Nextec") filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of NY against Brookwood Companies, Inc. ("Brookwood"), a fully owned subsidiary of Hallwood Group, Inc. ("Hallwood"). Nextec's legal action arises under the patent laws of the United States and alleges that Brookwood has and continues to, with prior notice and knowledge of Nextec's patent rights, intentionally and willfully infringed on numerous patents owned by Nextec.
Through the discovery process over the last several months, Nextec's counsel has concluded and alleges that Brookwood infringes two other Nextec patents -- U.S. Patent Nos. 5,954,902 and 6,289,841. Nextec requested Brookwood's agreement to add these two new patents to the five patents already in the case. When Brookwood refused, Nextec sought leave to amend its complaint, which Judge Holwell granted, allowing these two new patents to be added. While the discovery is on-going and the information produced by Brookwood remains confidential, Nextec remains confident in its ability to prove not only infringement, but also willful infringement. If Nextec is successful in demonstrating willful infringement, Nextec can seek treble damages and attorneys' fees if deemed an "exceptional case."
Nextec's claims in this action alleged willful infringement by a number of fabrics produced by Brookwood (and methods of making them), including those fabrics that constitute two of the seven layers that make up the U.S. Army's Gen III ECWCS (Extended Cold Weather Clothing Systems) program. The Gen III ECWCS is the 3rd generation of the Army's ECWCS, and according to Atlantic Diving Supply, Inc. ("ADS"), the prime vendor for the Gen III ECWCS program, "If all options are exercised the total contract value could exceed $1.1 billion." Nextec is seeking full damages for infringement of each of the patents-in-suit, enhancement of damages for willful infringement for each of the patentsinsuit, a permanent injunction prohibiting further infringement, and other relief as may be determined by a jury or a court of competent jurisdiction.
Nextec is a technology based fabric manufacturer and licensor of its technology. Nextec's patented technology relates to performance fabrics, methods of making those fabrics, and products made therefrom, that are water resistant, have low absorption, are breathable and durable. Nextec's fabrics were the only fabrics fully field tested by the U.S. Army as part of the Army's research and development for the Gen III ECWCS layers 5 and 7, and were the only fabric for layers 5 and 7 highlighted by ADS in its press release announcing that it had been awarded the Gen III ECWCS contract.
Peter Santoro, Nextec's Co-CEO, stated, "We are extremely pleased with the court's most recent decision and our owners at General Electric and all our other partners remain extremely confident that this case will be resolved in Nextec's favor. We have currently spent over $2 million on this suit and believe that this investment will, in the end, produce extremely good returns for our company. We now are actively investigating others that may also be infringing on our patents. As I stated in the previous press release, we will hold all parties, at all levels in a supply chain, accountable that infringe on Nextec's patents and, based on U.S. patent law, all parties that use an infringing fabric at any stage in a garment manufacturing process, including its ultimate sale, would also infringe a patent holder's patents and may be liable."
Section 271(a) of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. Section 271(a), provides in pertinent part:
[W]hoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefore, infringes the patent.
Section 284 of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. 284, provides for treble damages in certain instances of willful infringement. Section 285 of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. 285, provides for reasonable attorneys' fees to be paid to the prevailing party in "exceptional cases."
Mr. Santoro went on to say, "We remain confident that the discovery process will produce the evidence needed to prove infringement of Nextec's patents. The Court's decision to allow two additional patents that Nextec believes are infringed really ups the ante in this case for Brookwood." Source
Through the discovery process over the last several months, Nextec's counsel has concluded and alleges that Brookwood infringes two other Nextec patents -- U.S. Patent Nos. 5,954,902 and 6,289,841. Nextec requested Brookwood's agreement to add these two new patents to the five patents already in the case. When Brookwood refused, Nextec sought leave to amend its complaint, which Judge Holwell granted, allowing these two new patents to be added. While the discovery is on-going and the information produced by Brookwood remains confidential, Nextec remains confident in its ability to prove not only infringement, but also willful infringement. If Nextec is successful in demonstrating willful infringement, Nextec can seek treble damages and attorneys' fees if deemed an "exceptional case."
Nextec's claims in this action alleged willful infringement by a number of fabrics produced by Brookwood (and methods of making them), including those fabrics that constitute two of the seven layers that make up the U.S. Army's Gen III ECWCS (Extended Cold Weather Clothing Systems) program. The Gen III ECWCS is the 3rd generation of the Army's ECWCS, and according to Atlantic Diving Supply, Inc. ("ADS"), the prime vendor for the Gen III ECWCS program, "If all options are exercised the total contract value could exceed $1.1 billion." Nextec is seeking full damages for infringement of each of the patents-in-suit, enhancement of damages for willful infringement for each of the patentsinsuit, a permanent injunction prohibiting further infringement, and other relief as may be determined by a jury or a court of competent jurisdiction.
Nextec is a technology based fabric manufacturer and licensor of its technology. Nextec's patented technology relates to performance fabrics, methods of making those fabrics, and products made therefrom, that are water resistant, have low absorption, are breathable and durable. Nextec's fabrics were the only fabrics fully field tested by the U.S. Army as part of the Army's research and development for the Gen III ECWCS layers 5 and 7, and were the only fabric for layers 5 and 7 highlighted by ADS in its press release announcing that it had been awarded the Gen III ECWCS contract.
Peter Santoro, Nextec's Co-CEO, stated, "We are extremely pleased with the court's most recent decision and our owners at General Electric and all our other partners remain extremely confident that this case will be resolved in Nextec's favor. We have currently spent over $2 million on this suit and believe that this investment will, in the end, produce extremely good returns for our company. We now are actively investigating others that may also be infringing on our patents. As I stated in the previous press release, we will hold all parties, at all levels in a supply chain, accountable that infringe on Nextec's patents and, based on U.S. patent law, all parties that use an infringing fabric at any stage in a garment manufacturing process, including its ultimate sale, would also infringe a patent holder's patents and may be liable."
Section 271(a) of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. Section 271(a), provides in pertinent part:
[W]hoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefore, infringes the patent.
Section 284 of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. 284, provides for treble damages in certain instances of willful infringement. Section 285 of the Federal Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. 285, provides for reasonable attorneys' fees to be paid to the prevailing party in "exceptional cases."
Mr. Santoro went on to say, "We remain confident that the discovery process will produce the evidence needed to prove infringement of Nextec's patents. The Court's decision to allow two additional patents that Nextec believes are infringed really ups the ante in this case for Brookwood." Source
ITC to investigate Wii patent infringment claim
The U.S. International Trade Commission said Wed. that it will investigate claims by Hillcrest Labortories that Nintendo Co. infringed on its patents in the popular Wii video game hardware.
Hillcrest in Aug. filed a complaint for infringement of four patents against Nintendo.
The Rockville, Md technology company claims that the Wii's motion-sensitive properties violate its patents related to a handheld three-dimensional pointing device and a navigation interface display system that graphically organizes content for display on a television.
The Wii includes the Wii Remote, a wand-like device that allows users to perform gesture-based actions in game titles. Nintendo in July unsuccessfully bid to overturn a $21 million patent-infringement ruling in favor of Anascape Ltd. The ruling involved a potential ban of sale for the Wii Classic Controller, WaveBird controller and Nintendo GameCube. Nintendo in Sept. said that the Wii ranked as the No. 2 game hardware in Aug. according to NPD Group Inc. To date sales the Wii have reached nearly 12 million units in the U.S. Source
Hillcrest in Aug. filed a complaint for infringement of four patents against Nintendo.
The Rockville, Md technology company claims that the Wii's motion-sensitive properties violate its patents related to a handheld three-dimensional pointing device and a navigation interface display system that graphically organizes content for display on a television.
The Wii includes the Wii Remote, a wand-like device that allows users to perform gesture-based actions in game titles. Nintendo in July unsuccessfully bid to overturn a $21 million patent-infringement ruling in favor of Anascape Ltd. The ruling involved a potential ban of sale for the Wii Classic Controller, WaveBird controller and Nintendo GameCube. Nintendo in Sept. said that the Wii ranked as the No. 2 game hardware in Aug. according to NPD Group Inc. To date sales the Wii have reached nearly 12 million units in the U.S. Source
Nichia Initiates U.K. Patent Infringement Lawsuit against Seoul Semiconductor for Important Thermal Annealing Patent
September 18, 2008... Nichia of Japan has again brought patent litigation against Seoul Semiconductor. On September 16, 2008, Nichia Corporation filed an action for patent infringement and damages in the U.K. against Seoul Semiconductor of Korea. Nichia’s lawsuit against Seoul Semiconductor alleges that Seoul violated what Nichia called one of its most important patents, the EP(UK) 0 541,373 patent entitled, “Method of Manufacturing P-type Compound Semiconductor,”(the Annealing Patent). It relates to a thermal annealing method for manufacturing a p type GaN-based semiconductor.
Nichia says that the Annealing Patent is fundamental and indispensable patent for the mass production of GaN-based LEDs and LDs. Specifically Nichia alleges that LED chips installed in the white LED products of Seoul Semiconductor’s flagship product line, the Achriche series, are manufactured using the process disclosed in the Annealing Patent. Source
Nichia says that the Annealing Patent is fundamental and indispensable patent for the mass production of GaN-based LEDs and LDs. Specifically Nichia alleges that LED chips installed in the white LED products of Seoul Semiconductor’s flagship product line, the Achriche series, are manufactured using the process disclosed in the Annealing Patent. Source
Limelight Networks settles patent lawsuit
Limelight Networks Inc. in Tempe has settled a patent infringement lawsuit with competitor Two-Way Media LLC.
Under the agreement, Two-Way is dropping its lawsuit against the Limelight. In exchange, Limelight acquired a non-exclusive license that allows the company to use technology covered by Two-Way's patents.
Limelight disclosed the settlement Thursday in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing
Limelight's shares closed down 0.7 percent at $2.97 Thursday.
The settlement stems from a lawsuit Boulder, Colo.-based Two-Way filed in April in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Limelight and several other "content-delivery network," or CDN, providers.
Limelight, one of the biggest CDN providers, stores videos, music files, animation graphics and other multimedia content in data servers for customers that have included Microsoft Corp., Nintendo Ltd., Electronic Arts and DreamWorks.
Limelight's fiber-optic network moves the content to people's computers as they download it on customer's Web sites.
Litigation between CDN providers has risen in the last two years as more competitors have entered the field. Internet retailer Amazon.com Inc, a customer of Limelight, announced this week it plans to offer such services. Telecommunications giant AT&T unveiled similar plans this summer.
Limelight faces two other patent suits. In February, a U.S. District Court jury for the District of Massachusetts ordered Limelight to pay Akamai Technologies Inc. $45.5 million for patent infringement.
Akamai, based in Cambridge, Mass. and considered the largest CDN provider, is seeking an injunction permanently barring Limelight from providing certain delivery services under its patents. A judge has yet to make a final decision on the matter.
Limelight Chairman and CEO Jeff Lunsford has said the technology in question in Akamai's suit accounts for about half its business. The company has begun focusing on new services, including the streaming of live events, to minimize the impact such a move would have. NBC recently tapped Limelight to deliver live and pre-recorded video footage of Olympic events for its NBCOlympics.com Web site. The summer games are considered to be the biggest live event to be streamed online in terms of the amount of content it entailed.
Broomfield, Colo.-based Level 3 Communications Inc. filed a patent-infringement lawsuit against Limelight in December. The case goes to jury trial in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on Oct. 14.
Last month a U.S. District Court judge for the District of Arizona dismissed a class-action lawsuit that shareholders filed against Limelight in August 2007.
Under the agreement, Two-Way is dropping its lawsuit against the Limelight. In exchange, Limelight acquired a non-exclusive license that allows the company to use technology covered by Two-Way's patents.
Limelight disclosed the settlement Thursday in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing
Limelight's shares closed down 0.7 percent at $2.97 Thursday.
The settlement stems from a lawsuit Boulder, Colo.-based Two-Way filed in April in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Limelight and several other "content-delivery network," or CDN, providers.
Limelight, one of the biggest CDN providers, stores videos, music files, animation graphics and other multimedia content in data servers for customers that have included Microsoft Corp., Nintendo Ltd., Electronic Arts and DreamWorks.
Limelight's fiber-optic network moves the content to people's computers as they download it on customer's Web sites.
Litigation between CDN providers has risen in the last two years as more competitors have entered the field. Internet retailer Amazon.com Inc, a customer of Limelight, announced this week it plans to offer such services. Telecommunications giant AT&T unveiled similar plans this summer.
Limelight faces two other patent suits. In February, a U.S. District Court jury for the District of Massachusetts ordered Limelight to pay Akamai Technologies Inc. $45.5 million for patent infringement.
Akamai, based in Cambridge, Mass. and considered the largest CDN provider, is seeking an injunction permanently barring Limelight from providing certain delivery services under its patents. A judge has yet to make a final decision on the matter.
Limelight Chairman and CEO Jeff Lunsford has said the technology in question in Akamai's suit accounts for about half its business. The company has begun focusing on new services, including the streaming of live events, to minimize the impact such a move would have. NBC recently tapped Limelight to deliver live and pre-recorded video footage of Olympic events for its NBCOlympics.com Web site. The summer games are considered to be the biggest live event to be streamed online in terms of the amount of content it entailed.
Broomfield, Colo.-based Level 3 Communications Inc. filed a patent-infringement lawsuit against Limelight in December. The case goes to jury trial in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on Oct. 14.
Last month a U.S. District Court judge for the District of Arizona dismissed a class-action lawsuit that shareholders filed against Limelight in August 2007.
Nichia sues Seoul Semiconductor in UK over annealing patent
Japanese LED maker Nichia Corp has filed another lawsuit in the UK alleging that the Acriche LED products of Korean rival Seoul Semiconductor Co Ltd infringe its patent EP(UK) 0 541,373 ('Method of Manufacturing P-type Compound Semiconductor'), which Nichia describes as one of its most important patents (relating to a thermal annealing method for manufacturing p-type gallium nitride-based materials). Nichia is also claiming damages.
The annealing patent is considered to be fundamental and indispensable for the mass production of GaN-based LEDs and laser diodes. Nichia believes that the chips in Acriche white LED products are manufactured using the process described in the patent. The firm says that it places great significance on the proper protection of intellectual property rights, and will continue to exercise its rights aggressively around the world.
In response, Seoul Semiconductor claims that its Acriche products are manufactured under a licence for related technology from Gertrude Rothschild Neumark (professor emerita of Materials Science and Engineering at Columbia University) and University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB), and that it has the means to establish non-infringement of Nichia's patent. Seoul also believes that it has sufficient prior art to have Nichia's patent revoked as invalid.
Seoul adds that it finds it hard to see how Nichia's patent can be valid over Neumark's [earlier] patent and preceding technologies. Furthermore, the firm says that it has an opinion from a Japanese patent specialist that multiple similar technologies have existed before.
Seoul says that it has raised proposals to bring invalidity lawsuits against Nichia's patents and have them revoked. Other lawsuits brought by Seoul to invalidate Nichia's patents are already on-going in the USA, Japan and Korea. "We pursue revocation actions to protect stockholder's rights," says Seoul. Source
The annealing patent is considered to be fundamental and indispensable for the mass production of GaN-based LEDs and laser diodes. Nichia believes that the chips in Acriche white LED products are manufactured using the process described in the patent. The firm says that it places great significance on the proper protection of intellectual property rights, and will continue to exercise its rights aggressively around the world.
In response, Seoul Semiconductor claims that its Acriche products are manufactured under a licence for related technology from Gertrude Rothschild Neumark (professor emerita of Materials Science and Engineering at Columbia University) and University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB), and that it has the means to establish non-infringement of Nichia's patent. Seoul also believes that it has sufficient prior art to have Nichia's patent revoked as invalid.
Seoul adds that it finds it hard to see how Nichia's patent can be valid over Neumark's [earlier] patent and preceding technologies. Furthermore, the firm says that it has an opinion from a Japanese patent specialist that multiple similar technologies have existed before.
Seoul says that it has raised proposals to bring invalidity lawsuits against Nichia's patents and have them revoked. Other lawsuits brought by Seoul to invalidate Nichia's patents are already on-going in the USA, Japan and Korea. "We pursue revocation actions to protect stockholder's rights," says Seoul. Source
Aruba Networks Files Patent Infringement Countersuit Against Motorola, Symbol, and Wireless Valley
Aruba Networks, Inc. a global leader in wireless LANs and secure mobility solutions, today announced that it has filed a patent infringement countersuit against Motorola, Symbol, and Wireless Valley. The countersuit concerns Motorola's (and its subsidiaries') infringement of two Aruba patents related to managing wireless computer networks and network security. The first asserted patent was assumed by Aruba in March 2008 as part of its acquisition of AirWave Wireless, Inc., while the second asserted patent was issued to Aruba in May 2008. Aruba is seeking a permanent injunction against use of its patented technologies, as well as monetary damages for infringing use. Source
Nintendo Wii faces new patent investigation
A U.S. trade agency has said it will investigate Nintendo, the maker of the top-selling Wii video-game console, to determine whether the player infringes a Maryland electronics laboratory's patents for motion-control technology.
The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington said Wednesday that it would examine whether the Wii system and accompanying remote controls violate patents owned by Hillcrest Laboratories. If a violation is found, the agency can block imports of the Wii. An investigation typically takes about 15 months. Source
The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington said Wednesday that it would examine whether the Wii system and accompanying remote controls violate patents owned by Hillcrest Laboratories. If a violation is found, the agency can block imports of the Wii. An investigation typically takes about 15 months. Source
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
United States District Court Awards $1.7 Million in Damages to Human Touch(R) in Patent Infringement Suit
Human Touch(R), the leading brand of high-performance, design-oriented massage chairs for today's modern and traditional living spaces, announced today that a U.S. District Court jury awarded $1.7 million in damages to the company in its lawsuit against WFO Imports, LLC, which does business as Premier Health Products, for infringement of its exclusive patent rights directed to key aspects of its Human Touch massage technology. Source
Judge Reinstates Damages To Cordis in Patent Case
A federal judge in Delaware granted a Johnson & Johnson unit's motion to reinstate 8-year-old damage awards against Boston Scientific Corp. and Medtronic Inc. in long-running patent infringement cases involving stents. Source
Optellios Sues Future Fiber Technologies for Patent Infringement
Optellios, a leading developer and manufacturer of advanced fiber optic intrusion detection system and security management platform, announced today that it has filed claims against Future Fibre Technologies (FFT) in an action pending at the United States District Court in the Middle District of Florida. Optellios claims that FFT has willfully infringed one of Optellios' patents, (US Patent No. 7,142,736) and, in remedy thereof, seeks injunctive relief along with monetary damages. More
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)
