No sooner does one patent issue disappear for Research in Motion Ltd. than another one crops up.
The company in November settled one local patent court fight, and in the same month sought a judicial declaration that it was not infringing on another firm’s intellectual property.
The Canadian maker of the ubiquitous BlackBerry smart phone recently agreed to settle a court tussle with a British Virgin Islands company called DataQuill BVI Ltd. Terms weren’t disclosed.DataQuill’s Web site says it holds intellectual property relating to the exchange and downloading of information over wireless telecommunications networks.
In a 2007 complaint in federal district court in Dallas, Research in Motion — whose U.S. headquarters is in Las Colinas and which goes by RIM for short — did the legal equivalent of a pre-emptive strike, seeking a judgment that it did not infringe on two DataQuill patents, one related to a specific data entry system, the other entitled “Hand Held Telecommunications and Data Entry Device.” DataQuill maintained that RIM did infringe the patents, court records say.
DataQuill lawyers in Chicago couldn’t be reached for comment. RIM also declined comment via a spokeswoman.
New patent case
In a similar vein, RIM is seeking a judgment that three of its smart phones do not infringe on four patents held by the Eastman Kodak Co.
According to court documents, Kodak sent a letter to RIM in August 2007 claiming infringements by three RIM product lines: the BlackBerry 8700 and 8800 series and the BlackBerry Pearl 8100 series.
RIM’s litigation notes that Kodak has sued three companies in the federal Eastern District of Texas over allegations of infringement of two of the patents at issue in its dispute with RIM. The defendants, who have denied wrongdoing, are Matsushita Electric Industrial, Panasonic Corp. JVC and Victor Co. of Japan.
In an e-mail, A Kodak spokesman, David Lanzillo, says the company is “disappointed that RIM has chosen to end discussions that appeared to be on a reasonable path forward. The Kodak patents targeted by RIM are valid and enforceable ... (W)e are committed to protecting these assets on behalf of our shareholders.”
After receiving the letter from Kodak about the infringement allegations, court records say, there were five meetings between officials of RIM and Kodak to discuss Kodak’s allegations. At least one of those gatherings occurred at RIM’s offices in Las Colinas.
“At these meetings, Kodak demanded exhorbitant royalties from RIM for this alleged infringement,” RIM’s court petition says.
William Munck, chairman of the Dallas-based law firm Munck Carter, notes that by having a meeting in Las Colinas about the patents, RIM can now argue that the case should be tried in Dallas, in the Northern District of Texas, rather than in some other locale where it doesn’t want to go.
The Eastern District of Texas is known as “rocket docket” for its ability to try patent cases quickly, although a flood of litigation being tried there has slowed the pace somewhat, Munck says.
“It’s clear that (RIM) perceives they have an advantage here (in the Northern District), for whatever their reasons are,” Munck says.