Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Philip Brooks’ Patent Infringement Updates
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Philip Brooks’ Patent Infringement UpdatesRambus Comments on ITC Ruling
By Philip Brooks
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).
Katrina Victims See Justice, Ruling Paves the Way for Class Actions
Katrina Victims See Justice Ruling Paves the Way for Class Actions

Amici Briefs Supporting Supreme Court Review in FTC v. Rambus
Whyte grants Rambus motion in DDR2 case
"Court overturns government's ruling against Rambus"
Rambus stock tumbles on litigation postponement







