AeroMechanical Services Ltd. (AMA), is pleased to announce that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has granted its motion to dismiss and has dismissed Star Navigation Systems Group’s patent infringement complaint against AMA for a second time. The Court agreed with AMA that Star failed to properly join the two co-owners of the patent – Viraf Kapadia and Hilary Vieira — in the lawsuit.
On April 25, 2008, after having its original complaint dismissed, Star filed an amended complaint against AMA for infringement of US7113852. In the amended complaint, Star added its CEO Mr. Kapadia as a co-plaintiff, and unilaterally named Mr. Vieira an “involuntary plaintiff.” Messrs. Kapadia and Vieira are the co-owners of the ‘852 Patent. AMA moved to dismiss this amended complaint because Mr. Vieira did not qualify as an “involuntary plaintiff.”
The U.S. District Court has given Star until September 5, 2008 to amend its complaint to name Mr. Vieira as a defendant. If Star elects to amend its complaint, Mr. Vieira will have the opportunity to fully participate in the suit. But, Star and Mr. Vieira are currently embroiled in a dispute in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice involving, among other things, the ownership of US7113852.
AMA is the technology leader in aircraft health performance monitoring systems, and holds patents recognizing its innovation in this industry. AMA takes intellectual property matters very seriously.
Patent # – US7113852
Title – System and method for transportation vehicle monitoring, feedback and control
Filed – July 20, 2001
Abstract – A system provides monitoring/feedback to a transportation vehicle regarding the state of that vehicle based on, at least, information provided by sensors located on or in the transportation vehicle. Monitoring the transportation vehicle provides information about the status of the transportation vehicle and equipment on or in the vehicle. Feedback information is provided to the transportation vehicle based on the information received during monitoring. Additionally, feedback information may be formulated based on additional criteria received from equipment other than the sensors located on or in the vehicle, for example, meteorological systems, geographic location systems, e.g., a radar system, a global positioning system, etc. The information provided by the sensors and the formulated feedback information may be stored in memory on the transportation vehicle as well as at a stable location for archiving and subsequent analysis.
Vonage has agreed to settle partially on a patent suit with Verizon after the company was faced with possible interruption of its service. Verizon alleges that Vonage is infringing on seven of its patents on voice-over-IP technologies. A joint statement read succinctly “The parties are pleased to have resolved this matter.”
In March of this year, a jury found that Vonage is infringing on three of the seven patents, awarding Verizon with $58 million in damages. The judge issued an injunction which was stayed pending an appeal. Nevertheless in September, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the earlier court decision. Vonage then filed a petition for a rehearing.
If Vonage wins a rehearing on either the ‘574 or ‘711 patent, or if the injunction is vacated as to the ‘574 or ‘711 patent, Vonage will have to pay Verizon $80 million. If Vonage does not win a rehearing on either the ‘574 or ‘711 patent, or if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction, Vonage will pay Verizon $117.5 million.
Things got more interesting as AT&T filed a lawsuit against Vonage on October 17 for a patent on connecting a traditional telephone to the Internet. The suit was filed after two years of unsuccessful negotiations, however Vonage said they would resolve the matter with AT&T to prevent court proceedings.
Red Hat Inc. and Novell Inc. are being sued by IP Innovation LLC. and Technology Licensing Corp. for patent infringement. The court filing claims that Novell and Red Hat infringed on the plaintiff’s patent for User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects as well as two other similar patents. This is the first patent infringement lawsuit involving Linux.
According to the lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Novell and Red Hat are accused of infringing on the patents by selling the Red Hat Linux system, the Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, and the Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Server. IP Innovation LLC. and Technology Licensing Corp. further further contend that the defendants “deliberately and willfully” infringed on the patents, stating that the defendants were previously notified of the infringement.
IP Innovation LLC. and Technology Licensing Corp. are seeking an injunction from the District Court plus damages including other relief that the court might find proper. Novell withheld comment until their attorneys could further review the court filing.
Red Hat Inc and Novell Inc are accused of violating three patents.
Sanofi-Aventis said it is ‘considering all its legal options’ after the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling in the Lovenox anti-coagulant patent infringement suit against Amphastar and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries.
As a result of the Court of Appeals ruling the U.S. Lovenox patent is deemed to be ‘unenforceable’.
While several generic manufacturers have requested marketing approval from the FDA for their products alleged to be generic versions of Lovenox, Sanofi-Aventis has not learned of any FDA approval of these requests.
Anascape Inc., a small East Texas-based gaming company, sued Microsoft and Nintendo in 2006 for being in breach of no less than twelve of their controller patents. Filed in 2000, these patents include “Remote Controller with Analog Button”, “3D Controller With Vibration” and “Game Controller with Analog Pressure Sensor”.
Late Wednesday, a federal jury found Nintendo infringed upon Anascape’s patents while designing their GameCube, Wavebird, and Wii Classic controllers. Nintendo is being ordered to pay Anascape $21 Million USD for patent infringement.
Microsoft’s out-of-court settlement with Anascape before the Nintendo trial began is considered confidential, and no further information is available.
University of Florida professor Michael Moulton thinks copyright law protects the lectures he gives to his students, and he’s headed to court to prove it.
Moulton and his e-textbook publisher are suing Thomas Bean, who runs a company that repackages and sells student notes, arguing that the business is illegal since notes taken during college lectures violate the professor’s copyright.
Faulkner Press filed suit in a Florida court Tuesday against the the owner of Einstein’s Notes, which sells “study kits” for classes, including Professor Michael Moulton’s course on “Wildlife Issues in the New Millennium.”
Those notes are illegal, Faulkner and Moulton contend, since they are derivative works of the professor’s copyrighted lectures.
If successful, the suit (.pdf) could put an end to a lucrative, but ethically murky businesses that have grown up around large universities to profit from students who don’t always want to go to the classes they are paying for.
The suit could also have ramifications for more longstanding businesses such as Cliffs Notes, which summarize copyrighted novels.
Faulkner Press publishes two e-textbooks that Moulton wrote and uses in his classes, and sells its own set of class notes for the course.
But James Sullivan, Faulkner Press’ attorney, says the suit isn’t about money for the professors, it’s about protecting its intellectual property.