2019’s biggest patent case has nothing to do with patents

In a report published by IAM, Unified’s Chief Patent Counsel Jonathan Stroud explains that the US Supreme Court’s biggest patent law case of the year may in fact have nothing to do with patents. Most patent lawyers have probably never heard of Kisor v. Wilkie (argued in March 2019), a sleepy veteran’s appeal that—at first blush—appears to have little relation to patent law.

But they should take note, as Stroud points out that the Court in Kisor stands poised to overturn 64 years of precedent by abolishing a type of deference known as Auer (or Seminole Rock) deference which requires courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of its own rules. This would have significant repercussions on the amount of deference given to almost any action taken by the USPTO and could even go so far as to end the presumption of patent validity, which is premised on deference to the expertise of the USPTO examination.

The case has already drawn dozens of amicus briefs and law review articles, however all indications thus far seems to suggest that Auer deference is on the way out. For more information, view the complete report at IAM.

All challenged claims for Vilox Techs patent held unpatentable; Motion to Amend denied

On April 18, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents Inc. v. Vilox Technologies, LLC, IPR2018-00044 holding as unpatentable all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 7,302,423 owned by Vilox Technologies, LLC (an NPE). The '423 patent, was directed to a "search-on-the-fly" system and had previously been asserted against dozens of retail companies such as OrbitzExpediaPricelineNeiman MarcusBuy.comCostco and Walmart, among others. 

Haynes and Boone served as Unified’s lead counsel in this proceeding. View all of Vilox’s district court litigation here. To read the decision, visit Unified’s PTAB Portal.

MOAEC Techs. patent determined to be likely unpatentable

On April 17, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted trial on all challenged claims in an IPR filed by Unified against U.S. Patent 6,232,539, owned and asserted by MOAEC Technologies, a General Patent Corporation subsidiary and well-known NPE. The ’539 patent, directed to a music organizer and entertainment center, was recently determined to cover ineligible subject matter by the Delaware District Court in three cases involving SpotifySoundCloud, and Deezer. Those cases are currently pending appeal.

Lionel Lavenue, Trenton Ward, and Nathan North at Finnegan are serving as Unified’s lead counsel in this proceeding. View all of MOAEC Technologies’ District Court litigation here. To read the decision and to view the entire IPR proceeding, visit our PTAB Portal

Multiple claims of Sound View patent held unpatentable by PTAB

On April 9, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents Inc. v. Sound View Innovations, LLC, IPR2018-00096 holding as unpatentable claims 1-3 and 8-10 of U.S. Patent 6,125,371 owned and asserted by Sound View Innovations, LLC, a well known NPE. The '371 patent, which describes a multi-versioning method for maintaining database records to increase data capacity, has been asserted in multiple litigations against such companies as Fidelity InvestmentsFacebook, and Hulu.

Unified’s own Roshan Mansinghani served as lead counsel in this proceeding. View all of Sound View’s District Court litigation here. To read the decision, visit Unified’s Portal

All challenged claims for another Dominion Harbor patent cancelled by PTAB

On April 5, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents Inc. v. Blue Sky Networks, LLC, IPR2018-00069 holding as unpatentable claims 1-4, 7-14, and 17-20 of U.S. Patent 8,265,691 owned and asserted by Blue Sky Networks, LLC, a Dominion Harbor subsidiary and well-known NPE. The '691 patent, directed to enhanced wireless handsets operating in a direct handset-to-handset communication mode, was asserted in multiple litigations against such companies as ToyotaBest BuyMediaTekLenovoBLUHuawei, and Roche Diabetes Care.

David O’Dell, David McCombs, and Gregory Huh at Haynes and Boone, LLP served as Unified’s lead counsel in this proceeding. View all of Blue Sky’s District Court litigation here. To read the decision, visit Unified’s Portal