ITC judge clears Apple, Intel, HP of patent infringement allegations

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A U.S. International Trade Commission judge on Friday ruled in favor of defendants Apple, Intel and HP in a case pertaining to processor patent technology asserted by X2Y Attenuators LLC, a small technology firm.

In his ruling, ITC Administrative Law Judge David Shaw not only cleared the three companies of any wrongdoing, but determined the patents asserted by X2Y to be invalid, reports The Wall Street Journal.

The Erie, Pa., company first filed the complaint in June 2011, seeking an import ban over Intel's alleged infringement of three energy conditioning patents. Machines specifically cited in the initial claim were Apple's 27-inch Core i3 iMac and HP's TouchSmart 610 Series PC, while Intel's Core i7-950 3.06Ghz LGA1366 Desktop Processor was also named.

ITC Logo


In response to the allegations, members of Congress sent letters to the ITC in support of Intel, urging the Commission to not to issue an import ban.

From an X2Y statement regarding the letters:
Intel did not take a license, but appears to have adopted X2Y?s technology anyway. X2Y is willing, and has always been willing, to provide Intel with a license at a reasonable rate similar to that paid by its other licensees for their manufacture and use of X2Y technology.
From what can be gathered from X2Y's website, the company does not manufacture hardware, but instead licenses its technology to OEMs and parts makers.

As for Friday's judgment, Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy said Apple and HP are now indemnified.

"Needless to say we are gratified with this result," he said. "We said all along that we don't believe our products infringe and we questioned the validity of the patents."

The law firm representing X2Y, Alston & Bird LLP, disagrees with the ALJ's ruling and said it will request an official review.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34


    Another troll gets butted off the bridge and into the stream...

  • Reply 2 of 34
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,901member


    Companies that frivolously sue for patent infringement should be made to pay legal fees and court costs of the sued companies, if they lose.  They'd think twice about suing.

  • Reply 3 of 34
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,724member


    Funny you should mention it. There's a bill in Congress that would accomplish that.


    http://blogs.findlaw.com/in_house/2012/08/patent-trolls-may-have-to-pay-litigation-costs-new-bill-says.html

  • Reply 4 of 34
    Patents. They only serve big business, it would seem?


    [I]A U.S. judge ruled in favor of US defendants Apple, Intel and HP in a case asserted by a small UK technology firm;[/I]

    What a surprise. Waiting for all the people who bashed the British judge who required Apple to put a notice up on its website to come and bash the US judge. Oh, wait.
  • Reply 5 of 34
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,521member
    sequitur wrote: »
    Companies that frivolously sue for patent infringement should be made to pay legal fees and court costs of the sued companies, if they lose.  They'd think twice about suing.

    Who decides what is frivolous? If it is frivolous every time a person loses, how will a small inventor ever have a chance of protecting his/her patent
    against a multi-billion dollar transnational infringer?
  • Reply 6 of 34


    Originally Posted by quinney View Post

    Who decides what is frivolous? If it is frivolous every time a person loses, how will a small inventor ever have a chance of protecting his/her patent

    against a multi-billion dollar transnational infringer?


     


    If their patent is valid and actually being infringed, they have nothing to worry about.


     


    I don't get it; if you're absolutely, objectively right, what would you ever have to fear (in any situation)?

  • Reply 7 of 34
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,521member
    Patent suits, and the seemingly never-ending appeals, can be fought as battles of attrition. A big corporation is capable of bankrupting
    an individual, even if the individual is in the right. And what about cases which are close calls? Does the more wealthy party always win,
    just because of their wealth?
  • Reply 8 of 34

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post



    Patents. They only serve big business, it would seem?

    A U.S. judge ruled in favor of US defendants Apple, Intel and HP in a case asserted by a small UK technology firm;

    What a surprise. Waiting for all the people who bashed the British judge who required Apple to put a notice up on its website to come and bash the US judge. Oh, wait.


     


    What kind on nonsense are you spewing?  Erie, PA is in the USA, not UK.


     


    Are you trying to make some reference to another case?  If so, provide some links and some type of tie-in to how this is related to the topic of this thread. 


     


    Oh wait..

  • Reply 9 of 34


    Originally Posted by quinney View Post

    Patent suits, and the seemingly never-ending appeals, can be fought as battles of attrition. A big corporation is capable of bankrupting

    an individual, even if the individual is in the right. And what about cases which are close calls? Does the more wealthy party always win,

    just because of their wealth?


     


    Were I a lawyer and I knew for a fact that my client was right, I'd simply add whatever extra pay I'd need during a campaign to the winnings I knew he will get.

  • Reply 10 of 34


    Would be nice to see more of this. The so called "patent wars" are ruining the technology sector. I'd like to more of these frivolous cases getting thrown out. Not only do these cases bog down the courts but they impede innovation and competition. A lot of this has to do with the way the USPTO operates these days, they need to be more strict when approving applications to register a trademark

  • Reply 11 of 34
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,724member


    Ah, I see you've graduated from a simple mod to an Admin! 

  • Reply 12 of 34
    If their patent is valid and actually being infringed, they have nothing to worry about.

    I don't get it; if you're absolutely, objectively right, what would you ever have to fear (in any situation)?

    Objectively right? If it were that easy, why would we need litigation? Procedural justice is always a matter of power and persuasion.

    You make it seem as if courts always come up with the "objectively correct" verdict. You might just lose because the judge is having a bad day and doesn't like the look of you. Humans are animals, not computers.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,521member
    quinney wrote: »
    Patent suits, and the seemingly never-ending appeals, can be fought as battles of attrition. A big corporation is capable of bankrupting

    an individual, even if the individual is in the right. And what about cases which are close calls? Does the more wealthy party always win,

    just because of their wealth?

    Were I a lawyer and I knew for a fact that my client was right, I'd simply add whatever extra pay I'd need during a campaign to the winnings I knew he will get.

    The outcomes of complex cases cannot be predicted the way you imply. The possibility of losing a case which is less than clear cut will dissuade the non-rich from even trying to defend themselves. This type of legislation will make inventing things an unattractive career choice, thereby reducing innovation.

    Sorry, can't get quote looking right on iPad.
  • Reply 14 of 34
    kr00kr00 Posts: 99member
    The ITC should be able to view a patent infringement claim before it gets to court, rendering a summery judgement based on a patents relevancy, not just an ambient claim made by a troll. If the claimant then wishes to take it to trial, they should then have to face paying costs if they lose. There should be no need for lawyers in the first instance. A lawyer will always tell you that you have a better chance of winning in trial. Because that's what they get paid for.
  • Reply 15 of 34

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post



    Patents. They only serve big business, it would seem?

    A U.S. judge ruled in favor of US defendants Apple, Intel and HP in a case asserted by a small UK technology firm;

    What a surprise. Waiting for all the people who bashed the British judge who required Apple to put a notice up on its website to come and bash the US judge. Oh, wait.


     


    Certainly not. There are many instances of smaller inventors successfully asserting their patent rights against larger companies. However, the way this story is worded (and there is no telling whether or not it is accurate) it appears to be a political move. It would be very bad if genuine patent infringement cases against larger, more powerful and connected companies could be negated thanks to their political connections.

  • Reply 16 of 34

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    If their patent is valid and actually being infringed, they have nothing to worry about.


     


    I don't get it; if you're absolutely, objectively right, what would you ever have to fear (in any situation)?



     


    Actually, the biggest concern of any small company or individual inventor as a patent holder is the possibility that they will be bankrupted by endless or costly courtroom assertion and legal enforcement of their patent rights. Lawyers are not cheap, but they are often essential. 

  • Reply 17 of 34

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Ah, I see you've graduated from a simple mod to an Admin! 



    How does one person manage your total vote count in such a short amount of time, especially on a technology site?


     


    I can understand if this was purely a place to disseminate high school gossip, but seriously, you and a few others around here spend an awful lot of your life streaming every petty little thought you can muster on sites like AI.

  • Reply 18 of 34
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,724member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    How does one person manage your total vote count in such a short amount of time, especially on a technology site?


     


    I can understand if this was purely a place to disseminate high school gossip, but seriously, you and a few others around here spend an awful lot of your life streaming every petty little thought you can muster on sites like AI.



    ...and there's nine more here posting even more often than me over the past 30 days. Great to see regular active forum members isn't it, particularly courteous and respectful ones.

  • Reply 19 of 34
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    ...and there's nine more here posting even more often than me over the past 30 days. Great to see regular active forum members isn't it, particularly courteous and respectful ones.

    I couldn't find where you were finding the highest post count but I did stumble across the threads with the most replies. It's funny just how much Blu-ray v. HD-DVD was discussed.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,724member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I couldn't find where you were finding the highest post count but I did stumble across the threads with the most replies


    http://forums.appleinsider.com/pages/stats/top/range/1day/#members

Sign In or Register to comment.