Re: Our slow slip....ARM
in response to
by
Mosaic ImmunoEngineering is a nanotechnology-based immunotherapy company developing therapeutics and vaccines to positively impact the lives of patients and their families.
Message: Our slow slip....
ARM Ruled To Not Infringe..prior art documents.
ARM Technology Ruled To Not Infringe In TPL Patent Litigation
ARM intervention in case to protect customers has resulted in Texas Court ruling invalidating ’584 patent assertions against ARM technology
CAMBRIDGE, UK – Sept. 20, 2007 –
ARM today announced that on September 12, 2007, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, passed a judgment of non-infringement in favor of ARM as to all claims asserted before that Court by TPL (Technology Properties Limited) in relation to US patent number 5,784,584 (’584).
ARM joined the litigation in September 2006 to stand alongside the co-defendants – who are ARM® licensees – and respond to specific accusations against the company’s technology. Following a claim construction ruling by Judge John Ward on June 15, 2007, TPL decided to voluntarily stipulate to non-infringement. The judgment removes all accused ARM processor families (including the ARM7, ARM9, ARM10E, ARM11 and Cortex microprocessor families) from the Texas litigation, thus removing ARM from the proceedings in the District Court.
“ARM is satisfied with the result of intervening in this litigation between TPL and several Japanese licensees of ARM technology to combat what ARM believed were ill-conceived infringement assertions against its technology,” said Phil David, general counsel, ARM.
Adding to this blow to the ’584 patent, David also noted that in the currently pending re-examination of the case, the US Patent and Trademark Office has adopted the claim construction proposed by TPL in the Texas litigation and has issued a first office action invalidating the claim asserted in the litigation in light of a large number of prior art documents.
Outside of the litigation, TPL continues to assert US Patent 5,440,749 against ARM technology. ARM believes that this patent is not infringed by any ARM technology and that it is also invalid.
ARM Technology Ruled To Not Infringe In TPL Patent Litigation
ARM intervention in case to protect customers has resulted in Texas Court ruling invalidating ’584 patent assertions against ARM technology
CAMBRIDGE, UK – Sept. 20, 2007 –
ARM today announced that on September 12, 2007, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, passed a judgment of non-infringement in favor of ARM as to all claims asserted before that Court by TPL (Technology Properties Limited) in relation to US patent number 5,784,584 (’584).
ARM joined the litigation in September 2006 to stand alongside the co-defendants – who are ARM® licensees – and respond to specific accusations against the company’s technology. Following a claim construction ruling by Judge John Ward on June 15, 2007, TPL decided to voluntarily stipulate to non-infringement. The judgment removes all accused ARM processor families (including the ARM7, ARM9, ARM10E, ARM11 and Cortex microprocessor families) from the Texas litigation, thus removing ARM from the proceedings in the District Court.
“ARM is satisfied with the result of intervening in this litigation between TPL and several Japanese licensees of ARM technology to combat what ARM believed were ill-conceived infringement assertions against its technology,” said Phil David, general counsel, ARM.
Adding to this blow to the ’584 patent, David also noted that in the currently pending re-examination of the case, the US Patent and Trademark Office has adopted the claim construction proposed by TPL in the Texas litigation and has issued a first office action invalidating the claim asserted in the litigation in light of a large number of prior art documents.
Outside of the litigation, TPL continues to assert US Patent 5,440,749 against ARM technology. ARM believes that this patent is not infringed by any ARM technology and that it is also invalid.
4 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply