Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On Jan. 20, 2023, a Federal Circuit panel of Judges Reyna, Chen, and Stark issued an opinion, authored by Judge Reyna, with Judge Stark dissenting, in Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Apple Inc., 57 F.4th 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2023). The panel affirmed the Eastern District of Texas's final judgment that U.S. Patent No. 8,191,091 (the '091 patent) "is unenforceable based on prosecution laches." Id. at 1350.
Personalized Media Communications (PMC) sued Apple for infringement of the '091 patent by Apple's "FairPlay" digital rights management product. Id. After "a jury returned a unanimous verdict, finding that Apple infringed," it "awarded PMC over $308 million in reasonable-royalty damages." Id. The district court then held a bench trial on remaining issues and "found the '091 patent unenforceable based on prosecution laches." Id. The district court explained that "laches required a challenger to prove that the applicant's delay was unreasonable and inexcusable under the totality of the circumstances and that there was prejudice attributable to the delay." Id. Applying that "framework, the court found that PMC engaged in an unreasonable and unexplained delay amounting to an egregious abuse of the statutory patent system." Id.
The '091 patent issued from a massive patent family created by PMC. Just prior to the 1995 change in patent term calculation from 17 years from issuance to 20 years from priority date, "PMC filed 328 GATT-Bubble applications." Id. at 1355. "'GATT-Bubble' applications" are applications filed in an effort to "take advantage of the existing law providing a patent term keyed from issuance." Id. at 1350, n.2. PMC's applications were "atypically long and complex … containing over 500 pages of text and over 22 pages of figures" and initially included only "a single claim" that was "subsequently amended." Id. This strategy ultimately led to PMC prosecuting somewhere between "6,000 to 20,000 claims" in the patent family. Id. at 1350-51. At issue in this case, were claims related to a "method of decrypting programming at a receiver station" Id. at 1352.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.