Communications
-
District Court for Western District of Texas Denies Realtek’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction11/09/2022
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Bandspeed, LLC (“Bandspeed”). On October 13, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, denied the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction of defendant Realtek Semiconductor Corporation (“Realtek”), finding that plaintiff Bandspeed had “made a prima facie showing that Realtek is subject to personal jurisdiction by this court under Rule 4(k)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
-
PTAB Victory Against NetApp, Inc. on Behalf of KOM Software, Inc. Relating to Patents on Restricting Access to a Storage Medium09/22/2020
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client KOM Software, Inc (“KOM”). On August 17, 2020 and September 22, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued its final written decisions on three petitions for inter partes review filed by NetApp, Inc. against KOM’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,654,864 and 9,361,243 relating to restricting access to a storage medium. The PTAB found that multiple claims of U.S. Patent 6,654,864 and U.S. Patent 9,361,243 “have not been shown to be unpatentable."
-
“Samsung Loses Bid To Sink $5.9M Data-Transfer IP Verdict,” Law36009/03/2019 | Law360
Samsung can't throw out a jury's $5.9 million infringement verdict over claims its tablets and smartphones infringe a German company's patent on data transfers, a Texas federal judge ruled, saying there's substantial evidence to support the jury's finding and that courts should be "especially deferential" to a jury's verdict.
-
Ex Parte Reexamination Victory Against Samsung on Behalf of Papst Licensing Relating to Patent on Interface Devices for Communication Between Camera Phones and Computers06/28/2019
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG. On August 1, 2018, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Nikon Corporation, Nikon, Inc., Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corp. of North America, JVCKenwood Corp., JVC Company of North America, FujiFilm Corp., FujiFilm North America Corp., and Sanyo Co. Ltd. filed a Request for Ex Parte Reexamination of Papst’s U.S. Patent No. 6,865,449 (’449 patent”) with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), asserting that claims 1 - 18 of the ’449 patent were invalid and unpatentable. On June 28, 2019, the PTO issued its Notice of Intent to Issue Reexam Certificate, confirming the patentability of claims 1 - 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,865,449.
-
"Samsung Infringed Licensing Co.’s Patent, Owes $5.9M," Law36011/07/2018
An Eastern District of Texas jury has slapped Samsung with a $5.9 million verdict, finding it infringed two claims of German intellectual property licensing company Papst’s patent covering data transfers that occur in smartphones and tablets.
-
PTAB Victory Against Apple on Behalf of Papst Licensing Relating to Patents on Interface Devices for Communication Between Camera Phones and Computers04/01/2018
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG. On April 13 and 26, 2018, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued its final written decisions on two petitions for inter partes review filed by Apple, Inc. against Papst’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,504,746 (“’746 patent”) and 9,189,437 (“’437 patent”) relating to interface devices for communication between camera phones and computers. The PTAB found that Apple “has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence” that the challenged claims of the ’746 patent and claims 1, 4-6, 9-16, 18, 30, 32, and 34 of the ’437 patent are unpatentable.
-
"ZTE Settles in Multi-Defendant Cellphone Patent Suit," Law36001/03/2018
Chinese telecom company ZTE Corp. is settling in a consolidated IP suit from a licensing company that also accuses Apple, Motorola and other mobile heavyweights of infringing on data transfer patents, according to dismissal papers filed in Texas federal court on Wednesday.
-
PTAB Victory Against Qualcomm Inc. on Behalf of Bandspeed, Inc. Relating to Patents on Management and Use of Communications Channels in Wireless Networks09/18/2017
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Bandspeed, Inc. On August 5, 2017, August 23, 2017, and September 7, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued final written decisions on five petitions for inter partes review filed by Qualcomm Inc. against Bandspeed, Inc.’s U.S. Patent Nos. 7,477,624 (“’624 Patent”), 8,542,643 (“’643 Patent”) and 8,873,500 (“’500 Patent”), relating to selecting and using communications channels based on performance in systems that use frequency hopping protocols in wireless networks such as Bluetooth®.
-
PTAB Denies Institution of IPR Petitions Filed by Huawei, LG, and ZTE Against Papst Licensing’s Patents on Interface Devices for Communication Between Camera Phones and Computers07/01/2017
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG. In May, June, and July 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of four petitions for inter partes review filed by one or more of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., LG Electronics, Inc., and ZTE (USA), Inc. against Papst’s patents on interface devices for communication between camera phones and computers. The PTAB found that the petitioners had not established a reasonable likelihood that it would prevail with respect to any of the challenged claims of Papst’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,865,449; 8,504,746; 8,966,144; and 9,189,437.
-
PTAB Denies Institution of Nine IPR Petitions Filed by Apple Against Papst Licensing’s Patents on Interface Devices for Communication Between Camera Phones and Computers04/01/2017
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG. In March and April 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of nine petitions for inter partes review filed by Apple, Inc. against Papst’s patents on interface devices for communication between camera phones and computers. The PTAB found that Apple had not established a reasonable likelihood that it would prevail with respect to any of the challenged claims of Papst’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,399; 8,504,746; 8,966,144; and 9,189,437.
-
"Huawei Reaches Deal to Settle E-Watch Phone Patent Suit," Law36001/27/2017 | Law360
A Texas federal judge signed off Friday on a confidential settlement that resolves allegations China-based telecom giant Huawei infringed e-Watch Inc. patents covering cellphone camera technology.
-
"Apple Latest to Settle E-Watch's Camera Phone Patent Row," Law36001/20/2017 | Law360
Apple Inc. has become the latest technology giant to reach a settlement ending e-Watch Inc.’s claims that the company is infringing two patents related to cellphone camera technology, according to a document filed in Texas federal court on Friday.
-
DiNovo Price Obtains Denial of Qualcomm’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Asserting License and Release Arising from Acquisition of CSR plc07/01/2016
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client Bandspeed, Inc. (“Bandspeed”). On June 26, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, denied the motion for judgment on the pleadings of Qualcomm, Inc, Qualcomm Atheros, Inc., and Qualcomm Innovations Center, Inc. (“Qualcomm”), which asserted that the acquisition of CSR plc by Qualcomm Global Trading Pte. entitled Qualcomm to the benefit of Bandspeed’s previous license agreement with Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited. The court denied the motion, finding “a dispute exists on the face of the pleadings as to the factual relationship between [Qualcomm] and Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited, and the court will not take judicial notice of any facts that would connect [Qualcomm] to Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited.”
-
"Most Image Patent Claims Challenged By Apple Survive PTAB," Law36005/09/2016 | Law360
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board found Friday that Apple and ZTE showed that three claims of an e-Watch Inc. patent on digital image technology were invalid as obvious over prior art, but failed to show that eight other claims were unpatentable.
-
PTAB Victory Against Apple and ZTE on Behalf of e-Watch, Inc. Relating to Wireless Camera Phone Patent05/06/2016
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client e-Watch, Inc. On May 6, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a 58-page final written decision on petitions for inter partes review filed by Apple, Inc. and ZTE Corporation against e-Watch’s wireless camera phone patent, finding that Apple and ZTE “have not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that any one of claims 1 – 8 [of U.S. Patent No. 7,365,871] is unpatentable.”
-
PTAB Denies Institution of IPR Petitions Filed by Apple and Samsung Against e-Watch’s Wireless Camera Phone Patent07/01/2015
DiNovo Price is pleased to announce a victory on behalf of our client e-Watch, Inc. In May and July 2015, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of petitions for inter partes review filed by Apple, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. against e-Watch’s wireless camera phone patent. The PTAB found that Apple and Samsung failed to establish “a reasonable likelihood of prevailing in showing the unpatentability” of any challenged claim of e-Watch’s U.S. Patent No. 7,365,871.