Mosaic ImmunoEngineering is a nanotechnology-based immunotherapy company developing therapeutics and vaccines to positively impact the lives of patients and their families.

Free
Message: Chipping Away at the Quanta v. LG Electronics Patent Decision

I have been wondering the same therefore bounceing some ideas off af a patent attorney. FWIW, here is my latest exchange (I apologize for the formatting...not matter what I do...it all gets sucked up together...Agora....weak!):


My Question:

Below is an opinion from a stock research firm (Dutton)providing their thoughts on the Quanta ruling and how it will affect Patriot and their future licensing activity. Based on the disclosure statements I sent you the other day, from Fujitsu for example, where Fujitsu notified their customers that they purchased the MMP but that their customers were not covered by it, would you assume that we can still go downstream after Fujitsu's customers and collect a license fee? Because these disclosure statements exist, it appears that TPL/Patriots legal Counsel built this Quanta ruling into their patenting efforts so that they could continue to go after customers of chip manufacturers as well as get chip manufacturers to settle by offering lower license costs. It also appears that since the Quanta ruling has been made by the Supreme Court, TPL/Patriot can now go after non-licensed chip manufacturers and ask that they pay full price to cover their customers, or collect on-going royalties based on sales. Am I way of base, or am I understanding this right? Thanks

Response from Patent Attorney:

It would make sense that TPL would take less in settlements if they could go downstream to collect additional fees/royalties.

In the cases that I have been involved, any awards/ settlements have always covered the manufacturer and everyone downstream. I'm not sure how the case law falls in the TPL scenario. I guess Quanta sheds some insight. Ultimately, a patent owner can prevent anyone from making, using, selling..., which would include those downstream....so if a settlement explicitly did not cover those downstream, then some recovery should be allowed against those downstream, so long as the initial settlement against the manufacturer is taken into account. Again, I haven't researched this, but from a common sense perspective it works. Also, without having access to the contracts in place between TPL/Patriot and their customers, everything is pure speculation at this time. Obviously, the outcome of the pending reexamination will have a huge impact.

Good luck to you, me, us, and all longs.


Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply