ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Philip Brooks’ Patent Infringement Updates

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Patent Law

: Philip Brooks’ Patent Infringement Updates

Rambus Comments on ITC Ruling

By Philip Brooks

ADVERTISEMENTS

The following is excerpted from remarks by Tom Lavelle, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for Rambus, during the Rambus, Inc. Q4 2009 earnings call on January 28, 2010 available in the transcript of the call at Seeking Alpha:

As we announced last Friday, in the case filed against NVIDIA and the other respondents using NVIDIA products, Administrative Law Judge Essex found three of the five patents we asserted valid, enforceable and infringed by NVIDIA. These three patents are known as the Part 1 patents.

On the other hand, the ALJ determined there was no violation regarding the other two patents we asserted in the case Ware patent as well. More on that in a minute. This is an unequivocal win for Rambus. Infringement of a single claim of one patent is all that is needed as the basis for the ITC to issue an exclusion order.

We have numerous claims in the three patents that the ALJ found to be valid, enforceable and infringed by NVIDIA. The next step in this process is for the parties to petition the full commission to review the initial decision. The target date for the Commission?s decision is May 24th of this year. After that there will be avenues of appeal available to both sides in the matter.

If the Commission agrees with the initial decision, we could see the signing of an executive order mid-year, which bars the importation of infringing NVIDIA products and of the other respondents' products which contain infringing NVIDIA products. That order would also require that NVIDIA and other domestic respondents cease and desist the sale of infringing products in the United States.

Our ultimate goal in pursuing this and the patent infringement action against NVIDIA is to get fair compensation for the use of our patented inventions in the past and to ensure that we protect our IP rights going forward including protection of our proprietary leadership products. Returning to the Ware patents, we do plan on appealing to the full commission with regard to their validity and infringement by NVIDIA?s accused products.

Access the full transcript here.

Full post as published by Philip Brooks’ Patent Infringement Updates on February 01, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0157 secs (new cache)