Posts Tagged: "mobile devices"

The Qualcomm decision is unique in that it appears to be the first decision to require a SEP holder to license its patented technology to its competitors, and not just its downstream customers, on FRAND terms.  This decision casts doubt on the longstanding practice, common in industries such as the telecommunication and automotive industries, in which SEP holders seek to secure “FRAND” licenses with downstream companies that make finished products, while refusing to license (or licensing on non-FRAND terms) those same SEPs to their competitors or other companies further up the supply chain (such as component suppliers).  The decision also emphasizes U.S. courts’ focus on the express language of SSOs’ IPR policies and the willingness to review the SSO guidelines in interpreting the agreements SEP holders enter into with SSOs.  In this regard, the decision may bode well for SEP implementers, given the court’s broad understanding of what it means to “practice” a relevant standard and its view that SEP holders’ FRAND obligations extend to all potential licensees, irrespective of their position in the supply chain.

On Tuesday, November 20th, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential decision in Google LLC v. Conversant Wireless Licensing, which vacated a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to uphold the validity of patent claims owned by Conversant after conducting an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding petitioned by Google and LG Electronics… It is hard to reconcile decisions where the Federal Circuit bends over backwards to give more process and procedural rights to petitioners when for so long patent owners have been railroaded at the PTAB and then had those summary execution proceedings rubber stamped by the Federal Circuit. If increased scrutiny on the PTAB is a two-way street I welcome it.

Despite finding patent infringement under Section 337 and upholding the validity of Qualcomm’s asserted patents, ALJ Pender found that the statutory public interest factors weighed against issuing a limited exclusion order in this case. This turns the victory for Qualcomm into nothing more than a pyrrhic victory at best given that the only remedy the ITC can hand out are exclusion orders and cease and desist orders. The ITC does not have any jurisdiction to hand out monetary damages. So what exactly would Qualcomm receive for Apple’s infringement? What exactly would Apple be required to pay or change as the result of engaging in infringing behavior? It would seem that there will be no remedy for Qualcomm under ALJ Pender’s decision, and no consequences for Apple infringing the patent claims that have been confirmed valid. 

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a ruling on discussing the equitable doctrine of implied waiver; a decision that will be particularly important for those participating in the standard setting process and engaging with standard setting organizations, or SSOs as they are sometimes called. According to the Federal Circuit, failure to disclose patents and applications relevant to a standard may render a patent unenforceable based on an implied waiver.  See Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., No. 17-2102, 2018 (Fed Cir. Aug. 16, 2018) (Before Reyna, Bryson, and Hughes, Circuit Judges) (Opinion for the court, Bryson, Circuit Judge).

On Thursday, August 9th, San Diego, CA-based semiconductor developer Qualcomm Inc. announced that it reached a mutually agreed settlement with the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission (TFTC) which greatly reduces the financial penalty assessed to Qualcomm by the TFTC for antitrust issues. Although the TFTC will retain about $93 million USD in fines which have been paid by Qualcomm through July, the settlement eliminates the remainder of the original fine valued at $773 million USD and issued by Taiwan’s fair trade regulator last October.

Swedish multinational telecommunications company Ericsson and South Korean consumer electronics firm LG Electronics announced that they had entered into a global licensing agreement to cross-license patent portfolios held by both companies. The patents in these portfolios include standard-essential patents (SEPs) related to various cellular technologies, including those related to second generation (2G), third generation (3G) and fourth generation (4G) cellular standards.

PopSockets filed its Section 337 complaint with the ITC last April, naming 14 respondents, with 13 based in China and one operating in Hong Kong. This February, the administrative law judge (ALJ) assigned to the case found that not only did the accused products infringe PopSockets’ ‘031 patent, but the infringement was widespread, going beyond the 14 named respondents, such that a general exclusion order was warranted, barring the import of infringing products into the United States by anyone, not just the named respondents.

On Tuesday, August 8th, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced that it was opening up an investigation on claims that Cupertino, CA-based consumer electronics behemoth Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) is infringing upon patented technologies, specifically baseband processor modems, in its mobile electronic devices. The investigation follows a Section 337 patent infringement complaint filed on July 7th with the ITC by…

Now with smartphones always-on and within reach 24/7, the way businesses need to communicate information to customers is through their mobile devices. And statistics show that the preferred method for reaching customers by their phones is via text message. For example, 70 percent of customers say texts are a good way to get their attention, and 90 percent of customers will open a text message within three minutes of receiving it, according to mobilesquared, an industry analysis firm.

Qualcomm, Inc. (NASDAQ:QCOM) of San Diego, CA, is a multinational semiconductor firm that designs and markets wireless telecommunications products. Despite weak global demand for new smartphone products, Qualcomm’s technology licensing division has made a series of deals with Chinese handset makers which should bolster flagging profits through 2016. In early April, Qualcomm announced that it had entered into a licensing…

Sony is one of the giants of the patenting world and in 2014, it placed 4th among all companies receiving patent grants from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, earning 3,214 U.S. patents that year. This was despite the fact that Sony was only one of two members of the top 10 who received fewer patents in 2014 than it did in 2013. The patent portfolio analysis tools at Innography are showing us that Sony has earned 2,489 U.S. patents so far in 2015, so it’s likely that Sony’s 2015 patent totals will dip again. According to 2015 patent data, much of Sony’s research and development has focused on processing of information and images, along with control units and solid state imaging. head mounted displaySony’s focus on developing head-mounted devices for virtual reality systems has resulted in a couple of recently issued patents…

In the world of smartphones, it’s looking like paranoia is becoming much more profitable in recent years. Huge security breaches at major corporations around the world have made people everywhere much more aware of the technological risks they run in their own daily lives. We’ve already reported on the value of patent portfolios focused on mobile device security here on…

In terms of innovation, it’s clear that there is an almost singular focus at Apple on research and development in its long line of mobile electronic devices. Patents issued by the USPTO in recent weeks showcase everything from wrap-around device displays to handset systems which can change modes if a user moves the phone away from his or her ear. Other patents show featured water exposure indicators for portable electronic devices and a method of determining characters that are handwritten on a touch-sensitive screen. Recently published patent applications discuss the improved use of mobile devices for emergency response, including one that details internal smoke detector circuitry for personal electronics.

We’ve discussed Samsung’s recent issues in their smartphone and other mobile electronic device divisions in previous coverage of the electronics giant, which is why it’s interesting to see the corporation continue to pursue so much innovation in those fields. Despite restructuring of the mobile division and expectations that mobile device offerings from Samsung will diminish in number, some incredible advancements in mobile tech are still being created by the company, such as the development of a mobile payment system to rival Apple Pay which will likely be released in the first half of 2015. Samsung has also released an upgraded version of the Galaxy Note 4 mobile device which is capable of download speeds approaching 300 megabytes per second. According to a study released by the American Consumer Satisfaction Index, Samsung is actually outperforming Apple in terms of customer satisfaction in the cellular telephones industry.