ITC Invalidates Kodak’s Last Patent ‘218 in Case Against RIM

rim_logo_blue

This ongoing patent feud between Kodak and RIM looks like it has finally come to a close. It has been going on for years (Jan 2010) and was struck a serious blow in when it was deemed invalid by one of the judges on the commission earlier this year. Kodak asked for the whole commission to hear to review the decision but instead the ITC made the decision final. That means that Kodak’s patent on taking a picture and showing the picture on a screen (Kodak Patent 6,292,218) is invalid.

From what I hear this is the reason most patent lawsuits do not go to trial. Companies don’t want their patents invalidated since they are more useful to waive around as scare tactics. Either way that is one more lawsuit RIM can put behind them. The full press release from RIM is below:

ITC Decision: Kodak ‘218 Patent is Invalid In Case Against RIM

IRVING, TEXAS–(Marketwire – July 20, 2012) – Research In Motion Limited (RIM) (NASDAQ:RIMM)(TSX:RIM), a world leader in the mobile communications market, today learned that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has terminated its investigation after making a determination in favor of RIM that the only asserted claim of Kodak’s U.S. Patent No. 6,292,218 for electronic cameras (Kodak’s ‘218 patent) is invalid.

On January 14, 2010, Kodak filed a complaint with the ITC alleging that RIM’s camera-enabled products infringe Kodak’s ‘218 patent. On May 21, 2012 Judge Pender reaffirmed the earlier finding of then-presiding Chief Judge Luckern that Kodak’s ‘218 patent is invalid. Kodak requested that the full Commission review and modify that finding, but instead the ITC made final the decision that the Kodak ‘218 patent is invalid.

"RIM is pleased that both former ITC Chief Judge Luckern and ITC Judge Pender, and now the full Commission, have confirmed that the Kodak ‘218 patent is invalid," said Barbara Parvis, RIM Vice President of Litigation. "RIM respects the valid intellectual property rights of other companies, but will vigorously defend itself against improper claims."

1 comment on this postSubmit your comment!