Category Archives: NPE Court Decisions
Wilson Sonsini has issued a Client Alert reporting a most interesting decision from District of Nevada decision in Email Link Corp. v. Treasure Island, LLC et. al holding “…that a patent subject to a terminal disclaimer was unenforceable against the alleged infringers because it was not commonly owned with the related prior patent, even though both patents were owned by subsidiaries that were wholly owned by the same parent company.”
The Alert concludes:
“This holding clarifies that two subsidiaries wholly owned by the same parent do not count as “commonly owned” for terminal disclaimer purposes. The decision underscores the importance of looking to the assignment history of the asserted patents and the relationships among the assignees in a patent family that are subject to terminal disclaimers when preparing a patent litigation defense.”
Note that the entities involved are Acacia and two of its subsidiaries. With the proliferation of NPE’s and their subsidiaries, and the confusing transfer of ownership rights among them, this decision could raise a new defense against such mass patent aggregators.
Expect this decision to be appealed to the Supremes.
Here is a link to the WSGR Client Alert with more information and background: http://www.wsgr.com/wsgr/Display.aspx?SectionName=publications/PDFSearch/wsgralert-terminal-disclaimers.htm
BTW, who sues a casino? Wouldn’t one worry that a bloody horse’s head is going to end up in your bed? Just saying…………..
The Federal Circuit in a recent decision affirmed a district court decision finding that cable companies did not infringe the asserted patents of NPE Rembrandt Technologies, LP.
Here is a link to an article discussing the decision:
Here is a link to the decision itself.
BTW, cute name for an NPE. But, apparently the paintings in the attic weren’t that valuable.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court and found no personal jurisdiction in Wyoming for defendants sued by NPE AFTG-TG, LLC, interpreting the Supreme Court “stream of commerce” cases.
See Cary Chien’s blog post here with more information: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a4c255ad-b2ee-4383-ad29-fce7e632d001
Allison Frankel in her latest “On The Case” blog reports on the shenanigans of Nevis-based NPE Variant Holdings in filing in ED Texas (surprise) and Judge Gilstrap permitting the case to continue:
Rambus gets bitch smacked at the ITC:
Nice job Rambus executives, keep the remarkable litigation track record going!!!!
Oh, and good bye to “Clarissahitable”……………as the CEO rides off into the sunset.
BTW, Rambus is not really a Patent Troll, but is only included because the geek world thinks Rambus is a Patent Troll.