Patent Infringement | "Political Candidates Sued for Patent Infringement"

By: Dennis Crouch
Source: http://www.patentlyo.com
Category: Patent Infringement

EveryMD v. Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich (C.D. California)

In a recent filing, Hollywood patent attorney and inventor Frank Weyer has sued Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and an estimated 4 million FaceBook business account holders for infringing Weyer's U.S. Patent No. 7,644,122. The lawsuit was filed by Weyer's company EVERYMD. That company provides communications services to over 300,000 medical doctors.

The complaint alleges that FaceBook business account holders infringe the patent by creating individual home pages for members of a group of members that contain controls for sending messages to and for submitting comments about the members. Download Complaint. In 2011, the patentee offered an open license to FaceBook business account holders for $500 per account. The complaint states that that reduced price license program "has ended."

The patent itself is in the midst of an inter partes reexamination originally requested by FaceBook. ?See Reexam No. 95/001,411. In the reexamination, all of the claims are currently on appeal to the Patent Office's internal Board of Appeals (BPAI) following a final rejection of the claims by an examiner in the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU). At least two other continuations of the application are pending and claim priority to the original 1999 filing date.

In 2005, I reported on Weyer's case against Ford for infringing his patent on user-selectable multi-color instrument panel illumination. In an earlier case Weyer sued Network Solutions and Register.com for violating his patent on the selection of an e-mail address based on a domain name. He has also sued Harley Davidson, Bosch, and MySpace. Those cases have all settled. Prior to law school, Weyer was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Lesotho and now works as a volunteer engineer in Antarctic expeditions. I should also mention that Weyer's book M.I.T. Can Be Murder is for sale on Amazon. His screenplay based upon the book has received multiple honors.

Source: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2012/02/everymd-vs-santorum-romney.html?cid=6a00d8341c588553ef0168e82aae24970c

Patent Infringement | "Blackhawk Network Responds to Patent Infringement Decision"

By: Press Release
Source: www.marketwatch.com
Category: Patent Infringement 

PLEASANTON, CA, Feb 29, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Blackhawk Network, Inc. was found by a jury in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin to infringe two claims of a patent. The patent infringement case against Blackhawk was filed by e2Interactive, Inc. and Interactive Communications International, Inc. on October 14, 2009 and related to eight lines of source code that were part of Blackhawk's gift card activation platform, but not used. Blackhawk has since removed the portions of the unused code found to infringe. This modification has no effect on how Blackhawk operates and has no impact on its customers. 

On February 28, 2012, the same jury directed Blackhawk to pay damages in the amount of $3.475 million to the plaintiff for the period from August 2009 through February 2012, with no further payments due as the result of Blackhawk's removal of the lines of code. While the damages represent an immaterial impact to Blackhawk's financial results for these periods, Blackhawk is weighing whether to file an appeal.

The same court previously found that Blackhawk did not infringe the claims of a second patent asserted by InComm relating to adding value to customer accounts at retail points of sale. 

About Blackhawk Network Blackhawk Network, a subsidiary of Safeway Inc., is a leading provider of prepaid and financial payments products for consumers and businesses. The company's Gift Card Mall(TM) offers the industry's most popular prepaid gift card and telecom products. Gift Card Mall reaches more than 165 million people each week through a network of leading grocery stores, big box, convenience, pharmacy, and specialty stores and is available through Internet retailers including GiftCardMall.com. Blackhawk Network's business solutions include reward and incentive programs that offer choice and flexibility through a wide array of card brands, custom designed Visa(R) prepaid cards and fulfillment options. Headquartered in Pleasanton, California, Blackhawk Network Inc. has offices in the United States, Australia, Canada, France, Mexico and the United Kingdom. For more information about Blackhawk Network visit www.blackhawknetwork.com . 

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/blackhawk-network-responds-to-patent-infringement-decision-2012-02-29

Patent Infringement | "Yahoo says Facebook infringes its patents"

By: April Dembosky and Richard Waters
Source: http://www.ft.com
Category: Patent Infringement 

Patent Infringement

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a0ccfe1c-61ba-11e1-94fa-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1nf7rgElN

Yahoo is threatening to entangle Facebook in a patent infringement dispute, claiming it holds right to intellectual property that is central to Facebook’s social networking business.

The claim comes just months ahead of Facebook’s highly anticipated initial public offering, which could give Yahoo a bargaining edge and potentially position it to ask for a stake in the social networking group.

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a0ccfe1c-61ba-11e1-94fa-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1nf7zRVFh

“Yahoo has a responsibility to its shareholders, employees and other stakeholders to protect its intellectual property,” Yahoo said in an emailed statement. “We must insist that Facebook either enter into a licensing agreement or we will be compelled to move forward unilaterally to protect our rights.”

The patents in question, between 10 and 20 altogether, cover social networking, advertising and personalisation, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Facebook said it only learnt about the matter on Monday, adding: “We haven’t had the opportunity to fully evaluate their claims.”

Intellectual property battles are relatively new for Facebook, but likely to ramp up as the social networking company currently holds only 56 patents protecting its technology. It has filed more than 410 US patent applications in the past 18 months, according to M. CAM, an asset management firm, with various web companies, including Amazon, holding several social networking patents.

For Yahoo, the patent dispute could be a strategic move to raise money. The timing echoes that of a similar claim Yahoo brought against Google in the run-up to that company’s IPO in 2004. Yahoo had acquired Overture, the company that invented search advertising, and succeeded in persuading Google to pay up for a licence to use the technology. Google handed over 2.7m shares, which were worth $230m when it went public less than two weeks later.

One person familiar with Yahoo’s deliberations denied that the approach to Facebook was prompted by its imminent IPO. Rather, it reflected the hunt by new Yahoo chief executive Scott Thompson to boost the performance of all aspects of the company’s business, the person said.

Source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a0ccfe1c-61ba-11e1-94fa-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1nf7EYgPl

Patent Infringement | "BackWeb, IBM settle patent infringement case "

By: Lisa Sibley
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com
Category: Patent Infringement

Patent Infringement

BackWeb Technologies Ltd.    said Monday it reached a settlement in its previously announced patent infringement litigation against IBM Corp.    
 
Santa Clara-based software communication company BackWeb (OTC Pink:BWEBF) filed a lawsuit in September 2010 alleging patent infringement and seeking damages, an injunction and a declaration by the court that IBM's software update technologies infringed on BackWeb's patents.

According to a prepared statement, BackWeb said all the claims have been resolved and BackWeb's patents are now licensed to IBM (NYSE:IBM).

However, a separate patent litigation between Palo Alto-based Hewlett-Packard Co    . (NYSE:HPQ) and BackWeb continues.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2012/02/27/backweb-settled-patent-infringement.html

Patent Infringement | "ContentGuard Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against ZTE "

By: RTT Staff Writer
Source: http://www.rttnews.com
Category: Patent Infringement

(RTTNews) - Pendrell Corp. (PCO: News ) announced that its subsidiary, ContentGuard, has filed a complaint for patent infringement against ZTE Corporation and its subsidiary ZTE (USA) Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The company said that the lawsuit relates to ContentGuard patents covering technology that prevents piracy of content downloaded to mobile phones and other consumer electronics devices.

The complaint alleges that ZTE has embedded digital rights management (DRM) solutions in consumer electronics devices sold in the United States that infringe ContentGuard's patents.

ContentGuard was spun out of Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center in 2000.

Source: http://www.rttnews.com/1829136/contentguard-files-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-zte.aspx?type=qf

Patent Infringement | "Tech Week Ahead: Ill Winds on Patents for GE, Mitsubishi Heavy"

By: Susan Decker
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com
Category: Patent Infringement

General Electric Co. (GE), the biggest U.S. maker of wind turbines, is turning to a Texas jury this week to damp competition from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. (7011)

Opening arguments are set to begin tomorrow in a Dallas courtroom on a patent-infringement suit GE filed two years ago against Tokyo-based Mitsubishi. The trial may last through next week.

The dispute revolves around GE’s attempt to maintain its lead in the U.S. wind turbine market. The case is the second between the two to reach trial, following GE’s loss in a U.S. International Trade Commission case in Washington that sought to block imports of Mitsubishi’s turbines over different patents. A federal appeals court that heard arguments more than a year ago involving the ITC case has yet to issue an opinion.
Mitsubishi is accused in the Dallas case of infringing a patent on a way to keep turbines connected to utility grids during voltage fluctuations without sustaining damage. A second patent in the case, related to the turbines’ base design, was ruled invalid by U.S. District Judge Royal Ferguson Feb. 10.

GE, based in Fairfield, Connecticut, claims that at least 179 Mitsubishi turbines made for Iberdrola SA (IBE)’s renewables unit and Edison Mission Energy infringe the first patent. Mitsubishi signed contracts with the power companies in 2007 and 2008, and the turbines were installed in 2010 and 2011.

Mitsubishi has accused GE in a separate antitrust case of using its patents to monopolize the wind turbine market. That lawsuit is on hold pending the outcome of the GE patent cases.

A 2.4-megawatt wind turbine, the type at the center of the Dallas trial, currently costs about $3.2 million, based on an assumed $1.43 million per megawatt in turbine capacity, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s Wind Turbine Price Index (WTPIPALL).

The U.S. has the second-largest amount of wind capacity in the world behind China, according to a Feb. 7 report by the global Wind Energy Council.

ALSO WORTH WATCHING

POWER GRID CYBERSECURITY: The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations plans a hearing tomorrow to examine utility companies’ efforts to defend their computer networks from hackers. Legislation is needed to help prevent cyber attacks from crippling electrical grids serving more than 300 million people in the U.S. and Canada, House members and regulators say.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/tech-week-ahead-ill-winds-on-patents-for-ge-mitsubishi-heavy.html

Patent Infringement | "Toyoda Gosei sues Taiwan LED firm for patent infringement"

By: By Han Ting-ting and Frances Huang
Source: http://focustaiwan.tw
Category:  Patent Infringement


Taipei, Feb. 25 (CNA) Japanese light emitting diode (LED) product supplier Toyoda Gosei Co. Ltd. has sued its Taiwanese counterpart Formosa Epitaxy Inc. for patent infringement.

In a statement released Friday, Toyoda Gosei announced it has filed a lawsuit with the Taoyuan District Court in northern Taiwan, accusing Formosa Epitaxy of infringing on two patents asserted by the Japanese firm related to gallium nitride (GaN)-based LED chip production.

However, Formosa Epitaxy said the company has faith that there is no problem for it to use the technology.

Hsu Hung-sheng, a lawyer for the Japanese firm, said his client has sought damages from Formosa Epitaxy and requested the court issue an injunction to bar the Taiwanese defendant from manufacturing and selling the disputed LED products.

Before the legal action was initiated in Taiwan, Toyoda Gosei filed another lawsuit with the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Feb. 21, alleging that Formosa Epitaxy infringed on eight LED chip patents asserted by the Japanese firm.

According to Toyoda Gosei, the company is one of the pioneers in the world to develop LED chips and has taken the lead over its peers in technology after years of efforts in development and research, while holding a rich portfolio of intellectual property rights worldwide.

"We have respected others' and our own intellectual property rights in Japan and other countries, and have made our best efforts to further develop the market," the Japanese firm said in the statement.

"Particularly in Taiwan, we have not only manufactured and sold our products and procured parts, but we have also established cooperative relationships with our partner firms with regards to manufacturing," the company said.

Hung said his client has urged its counterparts in the world to exercise the fullest caution to avoid any infringement of GaN-based LED production patents of others in a bid to strengthen fair competition and further expand the LED market.

For its part, Formosa Epitaxy said as it has not received any notices from the courts in Taoyuan and California, it was unable to evaluate the impact on its operations from the litigation.

However, Formosa Epitaxy said it remains confident of its technology and will use the litigation as an opportunity to make a formal contact with Toyoda Gosei to safeguard its own rights. 


Source: http://focustaiwan.tw/ShowNews/WebNews_Detail.aspx?Type=aALL&ID=201202250006

Patent Infringement | "Comcast Takes Sprint to Court Over Patent Infringement"

By: Josh Long
Source: http://www.vision2mobile.com
Category: Patent Infringement 


Comcast Corp. has sued Sprint Nextel Corp. over intellectual property, marking a further rift between the two communications companies.

In a lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania, Comcast and TVWorks LLC, Comcast's wholly-owned video software subsidiary, claims Sprint is infringing on four patents that the nation's third-largest wireless operator uses in support of its mobile services, Light Reading Cable reported.

This is not the only court case between the two companies; a few months ago, Sprint sued Comcast and other former cable partners because they were allegedly infringing 12 patents connected to VoIP services, the report said.

Comcast is an investor in Sprint's partner Clearwire Corp. and resells Clearwire's services, but the cable giant is expected to move off Clearwire's network in favor of a joint marketing agreement with Verizon Wireless. That co-marketing agreement has already commenced in a few markets on the West Coast.

Source: http://www.vision2mobile.com/news/2012/02/comcast-takes-sprint-to-court.aspx

Patent Infringement | "Apple sued over voicemail 'patent infringement' "

By: Charlie Osborne
Source: http://www.zdnet.com
Category: Patent Infringement

Summary: A ‘patent trolling’ company has filed a suit against Apple over voicemail technology used within iPad and iPhone products.

Lodging a complaint with the U.S. district court in Florida on Tuesday, Brandywine Communications Technologies is launching a suit against Apple, citing patent infringement.

Brandywine believes that the voicemail technology imbued within iPads and iPhone products infringes on two patents that the company own, based on mobile technology - patents No. 6,236,717 and 5,719,922 held in the U.S:

Patent No. 6236717:

A simultaneous voice and data modem coordinates the storage of voice messages and data messages on an audio answering machine and a personal computer, respectively.
This allows the called party to subsequently retrieve, via the simultaneous voice and data modem, both a voice message and an associated data message, i.e., a multimedia message, where the called party listens to the voice message while viewing the data message. The called party can retrieve the multimedia message either locally or from a remote location.

No. 5719922 is almost identical to the aforementioned patent, both of which were filed in 2001 and 1998 respectively.

Brandywine may not be a household name, but for enterprises, it is known for demanding ’serial’ court cases. The company has already sued many industry players, including RIM, LG, Nokia, and HTC.
Last week, when the company was sued by Verizon over a separate collection of patents in spectrum technology, the communications corporation described Brandywine as a company that amasses a collection of patents, which are continually enforced through the filing of various lawsuits.

Although Brandywine has attempted in the past to sue Apple collectively, this time, it appears that the company has been singled out.

Source: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-sued-over-voicemail-patent-infringement/70031

Patent Infringement | "MacroSolve Files Patent Infringement Suit Against GEICO"

By: Press Release 
Source: www.marketwatch.com
Category: Patent Infringement 

TULSA, OK, Feb 21, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- MacroSolve, Inc., (pinksheets:MCVE) (otcqb:MCVE) ("MacroSolve" or the "Company"), a leading provider of mobile technologies, apps and solutions for business, today announced it has filed a patent infringement suit against GEICO Insurance Agency, Inc., GEICO Casualty Company, and Government Employees Insurance Company, all wholly owned subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. BRK.B +0.04% for violation of MacroSolve's U.S. Patent No. 7,822,816.

"Our patent underlies mobile apps that are deployed today across virtually all industries, including insurance. With this suit and others which we've already filed, we will continue to protect our intellectual property rights," stated MacroSolve Vice Chairman Jim McGill.

MacroSolve's lawsuit against GEICO and its affiliates claims that, "Defendants, directly or through intermediaries, made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least their GEICO mobile application product and/or service) that infringed one or more claims of the '816 patent and/or defendants induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more of the claims of the '816 patent by their customers."

On October 26, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued U.S. Patent No. 7,822,816 to MacroSolve. The patent, a significant intellectual property asset to MacroSolve, further advances its position as a leader in the mobile solutions market. The patent addresses mobile information collection systems across all wireless networks, smartphones, tablets, and rugged mobile devices, regardless of carrier and manufacturer, and is currently utilized in MacroSolve's rapid mobile app development platforms. MacroSolve's patent covers fundamental technology in the mobile application space utilized by multiple companies.

About MacroSolve MacroSolve, Inc., doing business as Illume Mobile, is a pioneer in delivering mobile apps, technologies, and solutions. Leveraging its intellectual property portfolio, MacroSolve enforces its landmark patent while providing mobile app products and services under the name Illume Mobile. MacroSolve is positioned to become a leader in the mobile app space, which is projected to become a $17.5 billion market in 2012 according to Chetan Sharma Consulting. For more information, visit www.illumemobile.com .

Safe Harbor Statement This press release contains projections of future results and other forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties and are made pursuant to the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Important factors that may cause actual results and outcomes to differ materially from those contained in the projections and forward-looking statements included in this press release are described in our publicly filed reports. Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to, the acceptance of our products, lack of revenue growth, failure to realize profitability, inability to raise capital and market conditions that negatively affect the market price of our common stock. The Company disclaims any responsibility to update any forward-looking statements. 

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/macrosolve-files-patent-infringement-suit-against-geico-2012-02-21

Patant Infringement | "Genetic Technologies progresses patent infringement law suit in the U.S"

By: Angela Kean
Source: http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au
Category: Patent Infringement

Patent Infringement

Genetic Technologies (ASX: GTG, NASDAQ: GENE) has negotiated a successful settlement with a group of companies associated with Sonic Healthcare (ASX: SHL) following the filing of a patent infringement law suit in the U.S. in relation to Genetic Technologies non-coding DNA technology.

The patent infringement suit was filed by Genetic Technologies in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin division, in January 2011.

This latest settlement concludes Genetic Technologies’ second assertion suit.

A third assertion suit, filed by the company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in May 2011 against 10 counterparties, is also progressing well with three counterparties in that case having already settled.

Genetic Technologies has now licensed its non-coding DNA technology globally to over 60 companies in a wide variety of life sciences industries.

To date, more than $73 million in contracted revenue has been generated from the granting of these licences.

Earlier this month Genetic Technologies entered into a Settlement and License Agreement with Colorado-based Eurofins STA Laboratories.

The agreement provides Eurofins STA Laboratories non-exclusive access to Genetic Technologies’ non-coding DNA technology for its products and services.

Genetic Technologies is in ongoing discussions with companies relating to the use of its non-coding DNA technology.


Source: http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/25549/genetic-technologies-progresses-patent-infringement-law-suit-in-the-us-25549.html

Patent Infringement | "HTC loses US patent infringement suit to Apple"

By: The China Post
Category: Patent Infringement

TAIPEI -- HTC Corp. has failed in its first attempt to sue Apple Inc. for patent infringement, after the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled against the Taiwanese smartphone maker. 

n the previous ruling on Oct. 17 last year, the ITC said Apple had not infringed on four HTC patents related to portable electronic devices, including the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad.

HTC appealed the ruling on Oct. 31, but the ITC agreed to review only one of the patents in the dispute, U.S. patent No. 6,999,800, a method for power management of a smartphone that experts thought was too weak to use to attack Apple.

On Friday, the ITC rejected HTC's claim, supporting Apple's contention that its products had not infringed the patent in question.

Taoyuan-based HTC expressed regret over the ruling.

“We are disappointed by the Commission's ruling, and look forward to reading the full opinion to understand its reasoning. We'll explore all options, including appeal,” HTC General Counsel Grace Lei said in a statement.

Friday's ruling was the first of three patent infringement cases HTC has lodged against Apple since May 2010, all of which have sought to ban U.S. imports of Apple's mobile devices, which are produced abroad.
HTC, the second largest provider of smartphones and tablet computers running on Google Inc.'s Android operating system, initiated the lawsuits after being sued a number of times by the iPhone maker for patent infringements.

In one patent complaint filed by Apple in March 2010 against HTC, the Taiwanese vendor suffered a setback on Dec. 19 when an ITC panel partially upheld its preliminary findings of a patent violation.
The panel said the world's No. 4 smartphone maker had infringed on one of Apple's four patents related to portable electronic devices, or the “647” patent.

The 647 patent describes a “system and method for performing an action on a structure in a computer,” which is related to the core of Google's open-source Android operating system and is widely used in HTC smartphones.

HTC, however, described the decision as a “win” because the company said the 647 patent is a small user interface experience and HTC will completely remove it from all of its phones soon.

In a separate ruling in a related case, the ITC said on Nov. 22 that Apple's Mac OS X system had not infringed on texture compression patents held by S3 Graphics Co., a subsidiary of HTC.
This forced HTC to review the US$300 million acquisition of the U.S. graphic chipset designer that took place in July 2011.

After back-to-back losses to Apple with Android-powered devices, analysts believed that HTC may turn to other mobile platforms, such as Windows, to diversify risk.

“Android makers require a high level of research and development ability to differentiate their smartphones from others,” Herbert Ho, a Taipei-based analyst at the Topology Research Institute (TRI), told CNA by telephone.

“We think cell phone vendors will not count on the Android system only,” he said. “Given that Microsoft Corp.'s Windows software has an edge in user interface and patent portfolio, we think all cell phone vendors will move a certain amount of research resources to the Windows platform.”

Ho predicted that Windows phones will account for 13-15 percent of the global smartphone market in 2012, more than double last year's 5-6 percent, and suggested that HTC should hedge against risk by making more new products with it.

Joey Yen, a senior International Data Corp. (IDC) analyst, said HTC might not enjoy a good position when it turns to Windows due to the partnership formed between Microsoft and mobile phone vendor Nokia Corp. in early 2011.

“Microsoft is actually supporting Nokia in more ways, including research and development and marketing resources. It has top priority on the list,” she said.

Source: http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/company-focus/2012/02/19/332053/HTC-loses.htm

Patent Infringement | "Symantec Alleges Patent Infringement Against Veeam, Acronis"

By: Joseph F. Kovar
Source: http://www.crn.com
Category: Patent Infringement


Symantec (NSDQ:SYMC) this week filed patent-infringement lawsuits against competing backup and recovery software vendor Veeam, and unveiled details about a similar lawsuit filed in November against Acronis.

In its lawsuit against Veeam, Symantec alleged that company of infringing on patents related to the replication of data.

Symantec said Acronis infringed on patents related to disaster recovery and to backup and recovery in virtualized environments.

Symantec declined to respond to requests for more information other than to point to a statement on its Web site which reads, "Symantec recently filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Acronis and yesterday filed suit against Veeam Software. Symantec invests deeply in its research and development in order to provide its customers with innovative technologies. Acronis and Veeam unlawfully leverage Symantec patented technologies in their respective backup and replication products. This free riding on Symantec is wrong and Symantec has filed these lawsuits to protect its intellectual property."

Both Acronis and Veeam issued statements and declined to comment further.

Acronis, in response, said in its statement, "We are aware of the complaint, and plan to defend it vigorously. This type of litigation happens all of the time between competitors in the software business and has no effect today on our existing customers or our ability to sell software to new customers."

Veeam, in its statement, said, "We do not believe the case has merit, we are looking into the claims carefully, and we will issue an official comment when this analysis is completed."

The two lawsuits are both available on the Symantec Web site.

In Symantec's lawsuit against Veeam, which was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court in Santa Jose, Calif., Symantec accused Veeam of four counts of infringement.

They include alleged infringement of Symantec patent number 7,093,086, which refers to using virtual machines for disaster recovery and backup; 6,931,558, which refers to methods for restoring data; 7,191,299, which is related to data replication; and 7,254,682, which is related to the creation of data snapshots.

Symantec's lawsuit against Acronis, which was filed in November in the same court, includes five alleged infringements. One of those, the alleged infringement related to patent number 7,093,086, was also included in the Veeam lawsuit.

The other four allegedly infringed patents include 7,565,517, which refers to targeting captured images new hardware; 6,615,365, which is related to storing computer disk images in an imaged partition; 7,266,655, which refers to synthesized backup sets; and 7,322,010, which is related to using a graphical user interface to map computer resources. 

Source: http://www.crn.com/news/storage/232601038/symantec-alleges-patent-infringement-against-veeam-acronis.htm;jsessionid=HLSgbXi30h9jYfHm6b4JGQ**.ecappj01

Patent Infringement | "Firm claims patent infringement by Intel, IBM, Micron"

By: News & Analysis
Source: http://www.eetimes.com
Category: Patent Infringement

SAN JOSE, Calif.—Atomic Precision Systems Inc. (APS), a little-known semiconductor equipment vendor specializing in deposition technology, has filed a patent infringement suit against Intel Corp., IBM Corp. and Micron Technology claiming that they willfully infringed on an atomic layer deposition (ALD) patent held by APS, according to a statement issued b the company's law firm Tuesday (Feb. 14).




The complaint, filed Monday in U.S. District Court for Northern California, alleges that South Korea-based Jusung Engineering Co. and its U.S. subsidiary, Jusung America Inc., infringed on U.S. Patent No. 6,812,157, an ALD patent held by APS, in its Cyclone line of ALD tools, according to the statement. Intel, IBM and Micron are infringing on the APS-held patent by using Cyclone ALD tools in chip production, according to the allegations.

According to the statement issued by the Lanier Law Firm, Jusung began licensing negotiations with APS over the technology in 2006, but did not reach agreement. APS alleges that Jusung continued manufacturing tools which violate the company's patent, despite not being able to come to an agreement on licensing terms.
 
Source: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4236344/Firm-claims-patent-infringement-by-Intel--IBM--Micron-
 

Patent Infringement | "Apple Asks for Court Approval to Sue Bankrupt Kodak in N.Y. Over Patents"

By: Joel Rosenblatt
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com
Category: Patent Infringement 


Apple Inc. (AAPL) asked a bankruptcy judge for permission to sue Eastman Kodak Co. (EK) over allegations it’s infringing patents that Apple says cover technologies used in printers, digital cameras and digital picture frames.
Apple said in a filing yesterday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York that it intends to file a complaint against Kodak at the International Trade Commission and a corresponding suit in U.S. District Court in Manhattan based on patent-infringement claims. The suit will seek an order blocking Kodak’s infringement, according to the filing.
While arguing bankruptcy law doesn’t prevent the filing of infringement suits against a company in court protection, “Apple requests express authority from this court before it initiates the actions out of an abundance of caution,” the company’s lawyers wrote in the filing.
Kodak will have the right to ask the court to halt the district court case until the ITC makes its ruling, though a court order on that request “is not required before Apple commences” its lawsuits, Apple said in the filing.
Apple previously claimed it is the true owner of the image- preview patent that is the subject of infringement claims lodged against Apple and Research in Motion Ltd. The Cupertino, California-based company contends that it developed a digital camera in the early 1990s that it shared with Kodak, and that Kodak then sought the patent on the technology. Kodak has denied the allegations.

ITC Rejection

The U.S. International Trade Commission rejected the ownership arguments in a case that’s still pending at the Washington agency. Those arguments are also an issue in the lawsuit now on hold in federal court in Rochester, New York. In yesterday’s filing, Apple asked to move that case to Manhattan.
Kodak, the photography pioneer that introduced its $1 Brownie Camera more than a century ago, filed for bankruptcy Jan. 19 after consumers embraced digital cameras, a technology Kodak invented and failed to commercialize.
The company, based in Rochester, listed assets of $5.1 billion and debt of $6.8 billion in Chapter 11 documents.
Andrew Dietderich, a lawyer for Kodak, didn’t immediately return a call yesterday after regular business hours seeking comment on Apple’s filing.
The case is In re Eastman Kodak Co., 12-10202, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District New York (Manhattan).

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-15/apple-seeks-permission-to-sue-bankrupt-kodak-for-infringement.html

Trademark Infringement | "iPads Removed from Shelves after Trademark Ruling"

By: http://english.cri.cn
Category: Trademark Infringement

Apple Trademark Infringement

Apple iPads are being removed from a number of retail stores in China following a court's ruling that a local company owns the right to the name, Hebei Youth Daily reports.


The tablets have been confiscated from shelves in many retail shops and electronic stores due to a Chinese company's lawsuit against the Apple Inc over the trademark infringement, in Shijiazhuang city, capital of North China's Hebei province.

Some retailers have removed the iPad tablets to back storerooms, fearing that local Administration of Industry and Commerce will confiscate them.

An inspection squad of the Xinhua District's Administration of Industry and Commerce in Shijiazhuang city, launched a campaign to crack down the sale of the tablets on Feb 9 after receiving Proview Technology's complaint. A total of 45 iPad tablets were confiscated by the authority in the district over two days.

Proview Technology, a Shenzhen-based company, claimed in early 2011 that Apple Inc had been infringing on its iPad trademark and launched court proceedings, said Xie Xianghui, a lawyer for Proview Shenzhen.
The company has extended its complaint to the Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce and appealed to three courts in other places: Shenzhen Futian District People's Court, Huizhou Municipal Intermediate People's Court and Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court.

Proview Taipei registered the iPad trademark in a number of countries and regions as early as 2000, and Proview Shenzhen registered the trademark on the Chinese mainland in 2001.

Apple bought the rights to use the trademark from Proview Taipei in February 2010 via IP Application Development Limited, a company registered in Britain. However, Proview Shenzhen claims it still reserves the right to use the trademark on the Chinese mainland. The two sides have been entangled in a legal battle ever since.

The Municipal Intermediate People's Court in Shenzhen rejected a lawsuit by Apple and IP accusing Proview Shenzhen of infringing on the iPad trademark in December 2011.

Source: http://english.cri.cn/6909/2012/02/13/189s680706.htm

Patent Infringement | "Apple Sues Motorola Mobility to Block Patent Claims in Germany"

By: Joel Rosenblatt
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com
Category: Patent Infringement

Apple Motorola Patent Infringement

Apple Inc. (AAPL) sued Motorola Mobility Inc. (MMI) in a bid to block Motorola’s patent infringement claims against Apple in Germany.
Apple, in a complaint filed yesterday in federal court in San Diego, said Motorola’s German suit is based on claims that Apple’s use of Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) components in the iPhone4S violates Motorola’s European patent. The German suit, Apple claims, is a breach of a patent-licensing agreement between Motorola and Qualcomm.
“As a Qualcomm customer, Apple is a third-party beneficiary of that contract,” Apple said in the complaint. Apple asked the court to block Motorola’s suit in Germany.
Motorola Mobility Holdings is a maker of handsets and set- top box devices that work with televisions based in Libertyville, Illinois. The company has won two rulings against Apple in Germany, and yesterday failed to win a third in a patent case involving the use of mathematical sequences in mobile telecommunications.
The Regional Court in Mannheim rejected the suit, ruling Motorola Mobility didn’t show that Apple is violating the patent. More cases between the two are pending in German courts, including a bid by Motorola Mobility to enforce its first win from December, which forced Apple to briefly remove some older iPhones and iPad models from its online store in Germany last week.

Google Acquisition

Google Inc. (GOOG), the world’s largest Internet-search company, is competing with Cupertino, California-based Apple and trying to lessen its dependence on search-related advertising for growth with a push into consumer electronics through a $12.5 billion acquisition of Motorola Mobility Holdings. That deal hasn’t yet closed.
Motorola, in a statement, said it declined to comment about details of the litigation, adding “we will continue to vigorously protect our intellectual property.”
The case is Apple Inc. v. Motorola Mobility Inc., 12- CV-0355, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California (San Diego). 

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-10/apple-sues-motorola-mobility-to-block-claims-in-germany.html

Trademark Infringement | "Cupcake kerfuffle: Sprinkles settles trademark infringement case "

By: Tiffany Hsu 
Source: http://www.latimes.com
Category: Trademark Infringement 


There’s room for only one cupcake company called Sprinkles, and that’s the one in Beverly Hills, a newly settled lawsuit seems to suggest.

The popular chain, which first launched in Southern California in 2005, recently settled a trademark infringement lawsuit against a Fairfield, Conn., bakery that was calling itself Pink Sprinkles.

That business, which opened in 2009, is now calling itself the Pink Cupcake Shack. Its website calls the shop “Fairfield’s first cupcake boutique in Brick Walk Promenade” and touts the staff’s decades of experience.

“The client had no idea there was anything called Sprinkles Cupcakes, because there were no stores here,” said Alan Neigher, an attorney for Pink Cupcake Shack. “It was an innocent mistake, and it was resolved amicably.”

Sprinkles filed suit in July against the Fairfield store in federal court in New Haven. Sprinkles claimed that the dueling names were “likely to cause confusion in the marketplace” and “damage Sprinkles and injure its reputation in the trade and with the public.”

Indeed, Sprinkles has worked hard to nurture its image. Founder Candace Nelson is a judge on Cupcake Wars, a reality show on the Food Network. Her cupcakes have been featured on "The Oprah Winfrey Show," "The Today Show," "Entertainment Tonight" and more.

The chain sells Sprinkles cupcake mix inWilliams-Sonomastores, including several in Connecticut, according to the suit.

In addition to existing stores in New York, Chicago and several other cities, Sprinkles said in the suit that it plans to expand to Boston, Philadelphia, Toronto, London and Paris. There's even a Sprinkles truck.
And cupcakes are a high stakes game. In recent years, the baked goods have become so trendy that a favorite activity of food trend watchers is guessing what the “next cupcake” will be.

With so much competition, Sprinkles has been a fearsome protector of its name. In 2008, the company went after Montecito, Calif., baker Sprinkled Pink Cupcake Couture, sending a letter demanding a name change the day after the store opened.

An attorney for Sprinkles could not be reached for comment.

Source: http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-sprinkles-cupcake-settlement-20120208,0,707139.story

Patent Infringement | "Apple accused of iPad patent infringement in China (again)"

By: Hana Stewart-Smith
Source: http://www.zdnet.com 
Category: Patent Infringement 


Summary: Apple is facing another lawsuit from Proview Technology’s Shenzen branch, who are suing under patent infringement for around $38 million.

Apple has already collected a small back catalogue of patent lawsuits over the last few years. Some it has handled successfully and some less so, like their ongoing battle with Proview over the ‘iPad’ trademark.
Proview Technology is suing Apple over the rights to the ‘iPad’ brand within China’s borders, seeking around $38 million for “damages” and, perhaps most unusually, an apology from Apple.

Apple and Proview have been engaged in a lengthy legal back and forth over the ‘iPad’ trademark for years.
Proview International Holdings, of which the Shenzen branch is a subsidiary, registered the ‘iPad’ trademark in Taiwan way back in 2001. The trademark was then sold on to IP Application Development back in 2006 for $55,000. Apple then got the rights from them in 2010, but as IP Application Development’s ties to Apple came to light, Proview took action against the company.

Proview began suing them for copyright infringement in 2010 for $1.6 billion, and when Apple

Source: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/asia/apple-accused-of-ipad-patent-infringement-in-china-again/939

Trademark Infringement | "Firm claims Apple infringing trademark in China"

By: http://www.google.com/hostednews/
Category: Trademark Infringement

SHANGHAI — A Taiwan-linked company which claims ownership of the iPad trademark in China has filed lawsuits and lodged complaints against Apple for infringement, according to a lawyer.
Apple lost a legal battle against Proview Technology (Shenzhen) last year after a Chinese court ruled the US company lacked evidence in its claim that Proview was infringing its trademark for the iconic tablet computer.
Xie Xianghui, a lawyer for Proview, which is based in the southern city of Shenzhen, said the company had now filed lawsuits through the courts and made formal complaints to the government after the ruling.
"We are requesting a halt to this trademark infringement," he told AFP.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
Proview Technology (Shenzhen) is owned by a Taiwanese company that registered the trademark name "iPad" in several countries including China as early as 2000, years before Apple began selling the product.
Apple bought the rights for the global trademark, but Proview Technology (Shenzhen) retained the Chinese rights, the official Xinhua news agency has reported.
The China-based company has previously asked Apple to pay 10 billion yuan ($1.6 billion) in compensation for trademark infringement.
Apple started selling its sleek iPad in China in September 2010, after months of grey-market action among avid buyers unwilling to wait for the official launch.
Proview had made a formal complaint to a branch of the Beijing Industry and Commerce Administration, as well as the same government agency in two other Chinese cities, which could result in fines for Apple, he said.
The company was also pursuing a lawsuit against Apple in Shanghai and had sued two household appliance retailers to pressure them to stop selling iPads, Xie added.

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iOY52HToVCVzVsGmpuAJC6loOnRQ?docId=CNG.013c9d26e5bc6771d8e4bb78654007fe.2c1

Patent Infringement | "Apple Sued By Motorola For Patent Infringement Causing Sales Ban In Germany"

By: Navid 
Source: http://www.techgadgetsweb.com
Category: Patent Infringement 

Apple Motorola Patent Infringement

Of late, a Germany court has suspended the decision regarding Apple’s right to sell its 3G enabled devices. The German court is speculating to allow Apple to resume the sales of its iOS devices.

Apple came under controversy as Motorola Mobility apparently placed charges of its patent violation on Apple. As a result, the US based tech giant had to pause its marketing and sales of its iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and iPad that are enriched with high speed cellular internet facilities through its online stores in Germany.

Such hustle has been common between the tech giants as law suits are becoming the demand of time.
Motorola is not intended to withdraw its charges on Apple & is looking for ways for filing even more law suits against Apple. Motorola is continuously claiming that Apple is involved patent infringement in various apps.

To be more precise, Motorola has recently mentioned that Apple used email “push” technology in iPhones & iPads for facilitating message sending which is copied idea.

Source: http://www.techgadgetsweb.com/7213/apple-sued-motorola-patent-infringement-causing-sales-ban-germany

Patent Infringement | "Motorola sues Apple for patent infringement"

By: Sinead Carew
Source: http://www.reuters.com 
Category: Patent Infringement 


(Reuters) - Motorola Mobility, which is seeking regulatory approval to be bought by Google Inc, has filed a new lawsuit against Apple Inc accusing the iPhone maker of infringing its technology patents.
The case filed in a Florida federal court on Wednesday is the latest turn in a bigger legal battle between Apple and Motorola Mobility, which runs its phones on Google's Android software -- the biggest rival of Apple's iOS mobile phone system.
Motorola said the patents cited in the latest lawsuit are the same ones it is fighting to protect in a different Florida lawsuit. This complaint is against two of Apple's latest products, the iPhone 4S and Apple's iCloud remote storage service for music and other media, Motorola said.
In the lawsuit, Motorola said it was suing Apple for infringing six of its patents involving technologies related to wireless antennae, software, data filtering and messaging.
A spokesperson for Apple was not immediately available for comment.
The filing follows a preliminary decision issued earlier this month by the U.S. International Trade Commission that Motorola did not violate Apple patents in another case Apple brought against Motorola.
In December, Motorola won a preliminary injunction against Apple in Germany, which could bar the sale of iPhones and iPad tablets in that country. Google agreed to buy Motorola for $12.5 billion in August in an effort to gain control of the mobile phone maker's deep portfolio of patents.
The case is Motorola Mobility Inc vs Apple Inc, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Case No.
1:12-cv-20271-WJZ

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/25/us-motorola-apple-idUSTRE80O29G20120125

Patent Infringement | "MacroSolve Files Patent Infringement Suit Against Facebook"

By: Press Release
Source: http://www.marketwatch.com 
Category: Patent Infringement 

TULSA, OK, Feb 02, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- MacroSolve, Inc., (pinksheets:MCVE) (otcqb:MCVE) ("MacroSolve" or the "Company"), a leading provider of mobile technologies, apps and solutions for business, today announced it has filed a patent infringement suit against Facebook, Inc. for violation of MacroSolve's U.S. Patent No. 7,822,816. 

MacroSolve's lawsuit claims, "Facebook, directly or through intermediaries, made, has made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least the Facebook mobile application product and/or service) that infringed one or more claims of the 816 patent, and/or Facebook induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more of the claims of the 816 patent by its customers." 

On October 26, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued U.S. Patent No. 7,822,816 to MacroSolve. The patent, a significant intellectual property asset to MacroSolve, further advances its position as a leader in the mobile solutions market. The patent addresses mobile information collection systems across all wireless networks, smartphones, tablets, and rugged mobile devices, regardless of carrier and manufacturer, and is currently utilized in MacroSolve's rapid mobile app development platforms. MacroSolve's patent covers fundamental technology in the mobile application space utilized by multiple companies. 

About MacroSolve MacroSolve, Inc., the corporation behind Illume Mobile, is a pioneer in delivering mobile apps, technologies, and solutions. Leveraging its intellectual property portfolio, MacroSolve enforces its landmark patent, while Illume Mobile provides mobile app products and services. MacroSolve is positioned to become a leader in the mobile app space, projected to become a $17.5 billion market in 2012 according to Chetan Sharma Consulting ( http://www.chetansharma.com/mobileappseconomy.htm ). For more information, visit Illume Mobile ( http://www.illumemobile.com/ ). 

Safe Harbor Statement This press release contains projections of future results and other forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties and are made pursuant to the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Important factors that may cause actual results and outcomes to differ materially from those contained in the projections and forward-looking statements included in this press release are described in our publicly filed reports. Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to, the acceptance of our products, lack of revenue growth, failure to realize profitability, inability to raise capital and market conditions that negatively affect the market price of our common stock. The Company disclaims any responsibility to update any forward-looking statements. 

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/macrosolve-files-patent-infringement-suit-against-facebook-2012-02-02