Patriot Scientific der Highflyer 2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION BARCO N.V., a Belgian Corporation
Plaintiff,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LTD., PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORP., and ALLIACENSE LTD.,
Defendants.
ORDER1 GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT ONE OF THE COMPLAINT
Defendants move to dismiss Count One of Plaintiff’s complaint. The Court has considered the moving and responding papers and the oral arguments of counsel presented at the hearing on February 12, 2010. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Barco N.V. (“Barco”) seeks a judicial declaration that United States Patents 5,784,584 (“the ‘584 patent”); 5,440,749 (“the ‘749 patent”); and 5,530,890 (“the ‘890 patent”) are invalid and not infringed by the following Barco products: Mar Declaration, Ex. D. The Court takes ju 2 dicial notice of this fact pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201(b) because the fact is not disputed and is capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably questioned. 3 Mar Declaration, Ex. E. The Court takes judicial notice of this fact pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201(b) because the fact is not disputed and is capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be Technology Properties Ltd. (“TPL”) and Patriot Scientific Corp. (“Patriot”); Defendant Alliacense Ltd. (“Alliacense”) licenses these patents to third parties on behalf of TPL and Patriot. On April 21, 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) gave notice of its intent to reexamine the ‘584 patent. On December 1, 2008, while that reexamination was pending, Barco filed the instant action. On February 17, 2009, Defendants counter-claimed for infringement of the ‘749 patent, the ‘890 patent, and United States patent 5,809,336 (“the ‘336 patent”). Defendants did not counter-claim based on the ‘584 patent. On July 21, 2009, the ‘584 patent emerged from reexamination with an amended Claim 29.2 On November 4, 2009, the USPTO denied a further request for reexamination.
II. MOTION TO DISMISS
A. Legal Standard
The Declaratory Judgment Act authorizes federal courts to “declare the rights and other legal relations” of the litigants in “a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. 2201(a). An “actual controversy” under the Declaratory Judgment Act is a matter that is a case or controversy under Article III of the Constitution. SanDisk Corp. v. STMicroelectronics, Inc., 480 F.3d 1372, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “Basically, the question in each case is whether the facts alleged, under all the circumstances, show that there is a substantial controversy, between parties having adverse legal interests, of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment.” MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 549 U.S. 118, 127 (2007) (internal quotation and citation omitted). “The burden is on the party claiming declaratory judgment jurisdiction to establish that such jurisdiction existed at the time the claim for declaratory relief
was filed and that it has continued since.” Benitec Austl., Ltd. v. Nucleonics, Inc., 495 F.3d 1340, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
ORDER DISMISSING COUNT ONE OF THE COMPLAINT (JFEX1)
B. Defendants’ covenant not to sue In their reply papers, Defendants proffer the following covenant not to sue: Technology Properties Limited and Patriot Scientific Corporation, each on behalf of itself and any successors-in-interest to U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584 (“the ‘584 patent”), hereby unconditionally and irrevocably covenant not to assert at any time any claim of patent infringement including direct infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducing infringement against Barco N.V. under any claim of the ‘584 patent as they currently read, and any claim in any reissued or reexamined version of the ‘584 patent that is the same as, or substantially identical to, any claim of the ‘584 patent as it currently reads, against any products made, used, offered for sale, sold, or imported into the United States by Barco currently or at any time prior to the date of this covenant. Def.’s Reply Appendix A. Defendants contend that this covenant divests the Court of Article III jurisdiction. In Benitec, the patentee “covenant[ed] and promis[ed] not to sue Nucleonics for patent infringement arising from activities and/or products occurring on or before the date dismissal was entered in this action . . . .” Benitec, 495 F.3d at 1343. The court found that the covenant not to sue in the future for infringement based on then-existing products was sufficient to divest the court of Article III jurisdiction. Id. at 1348. The fact that the patentee could sue for infringement based on future products did not create jurisdiction where the plaintiff had not engaged in sufficient steps to prepare to make, use, sell, or offer to sell future products. Id. at 1348-49. Defendants’ proffered covenant is essentially similar. Defendants have covenanted not to sue in the future for infringement based on products currently in existence. While Defendants do appear to reserve the right to sue for infringement of the ‘584 patent if subsequent events render the claims not “substantially identical” to the claims as they currently read, this difference is immaterial; because the USPTO recently denied a request for further reexamination of the ‘584
patent, the potential that the claim language could change lacks sufficient immediacy and reality to create jurisdiction. C. Barco’s potential claim for attorneys’ fees The parties dispute whether the Court retains jurisdiction over Barco’s potential claim for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Because Barco has not yet made such a claim, the Court
declines to issue an advisory opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 2/19/2010
Signed By JEREMY FOGEL
United States District Judge
Saturday, February 20, 2010 at 12:04 a.m.
Scott Beesonhas been promoted to vice president of product engineering and production at Holocom, a maker of network security systems in San Diego. Beeson, a mechanical engineer, rejoined Holocom 18 months ago after a management position with The Home Depot.
Matthew G. McDevitt has been promoted to executive vice president of real estate at BioMed Realty Trust, a San Diego-based owner of life-science buildings. McDevitt, who joined the company in 2004, previously was executive vice president of acquisitions and leasing.
Send items for this column by e-mail to onthemove@uniontrib.com.
aus: http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1334677#message
New Pacer--ORDER FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
posted on Feb 22, 10 01:45PM
New Pacer--ORDER FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
ACER, INC., ACER AMERICA CORPORATION
and GATEWAY, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED,
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, and
ALLIACENSE LIMITED,
Defendants.
HTC CORP. and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED,
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, and
ALLIACENSE LIMITED,
Defendants.
BARCO N.V., a Belgian Corporation
Plaintiff,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LTD., PATRIOT
SCIENTIFIC CORP., and ALLIACENSE LTD.,
Defendants.
ORDER FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Pursuant to the discussion on the record on February 12, 2010, the stay of proceedings previously ordered by the Court is hereby dissolved. The Court hereby adopts the following case management schedule. Avent Date Last day to serve amended disclosure of asserted claims and preliminary infringement contentions (and related documents) for United States Patent No. 5,809,336 (“the ‘336 patent”) April 19, 2010 Last day to serve amended invalidity contentions (and related documents) June 3, 2010 Last day to exchange list of “Proposed terms and Claim Elements for Construction” and “Preliminary Claim Constructions and Extrinsic Evidence” for the ‘336 patent. June 25, 2010
Last day to file joint claim construction and pre-hearing statement July 16, 2010 Claim construction discovery cut-off August 13, 2010 Defendants’ opening claim construction brief August 27, 2010 Plaintiffs’ responsive claim construction brief September 10, 2010 Defendants’ reply claim construction brief September 17, 2010 Patent Technology Tutorial* *If requested by the court Approximately 20 days after reply claim construction brief. Claim construction hearing To be determined Status conference Three weeks after the claim construction hearing nal infringement contentions 30 days after the claim construction ruling Final invalidity contentions 50 days after the claim construction ruling Defendants to serve willfulness documents; opinion of counsel 50 days after the claim construction ruling Close of fact discovery Six months after the final invalidity contentions Initial expert reports 30 days after the close of fact discovery Rebuttal expert reports 30 days after the initial expert reports Close of expert discovery Two weeks after the rebuttal expert reports Trial To be determined.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 2/22/2010
Signed by JERMEY FOGEL
JEREMY FOGEL
United States District Judge
Gericht stimmt zu zum Seitenwechsel der Anwälte von Barco - weiß zwar nicht, was das bedeutet, aber es tut sich laufend etwas.
New Pacer--ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR WITHDRAW OF COUNSEL AND SUBSTITUTION
posted on Feb 23, 10 05:38PM
New Pacer--ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR WITHDRAW OF COUNSEL AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL BY DEFENDANTS TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ALLIACENSE LIMITED
ROBERT E. KREBS, CA Bar No. 057526
CHRISTOPHER L. OGDEN, CA Bar No. 235517
NIXON PEABODY LLP
200 Page Mill Road, 2nd Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94305–2022
RONALD F. LOPEZ, CA Bar No. 111756
SUSHILA CHANANA, CA Bar No. 254100
NIXON PEABODY LLP
One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111–3600
Attorneys for Defendants-Counterclaim Plaintiffs
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED, and ALLIACENSE LIMITED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
HTC CORPORATION and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
Plaintiffs-Counterclaim Defendants,
vs.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED, PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, and
ALLIACENSE LIMITED
Defendants-Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR WITHDRAW OF COUNSEL AND SUBSTITUTION OF
COUNSEL BY DEFENDANTS TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ALLIACENSE LIMITED
Having reviewed and considered the Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel and Notice of Substitution of Counsel by Defendants Technology Properties Limited and Alliacense Limited and Request for Court Approval, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby orders that Ronald E. Krebs, Ronald F. Lopez, Christopher L. Ogden, and Sushila Chanana from the law firm of Nixon Peabody, LLP shall be permitted to withdraw as counsel of record, and John L. Cooper, Jeffrey M. Fisher, Nan E. Joesten, and Eugene Mar may appear as substitute counsel of record for Technology Properties Limited and Alliacense Limited. The Court’s ECF system shall be updated to reflect these changes.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 2/12,2010
Signed By JEREMY FOGEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Es geht um die "illiquiden" 10 Mill $, die über die Deutsche Bank angelegt wurden als auction-rate securities
aus dem Beitrag:
Other companies to settle with Cuomo are Bank of America Corp , Citigroup Inc , Credit Suisse Group AG , *Deutsche Bank AG* , Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs Group Inc , JPMorgan Chase & Co , Morgan Stanley , Royal Bank of Canada , TD Ameritrade Holdings Corp , UBS AG , and the former Merrill Lynch & Co and Wachovia Corp .
aus: http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1339027#message
New Pacer--JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STAY AND HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Die lassen sich Zeit = "stay of this action until July 1, 2010" und "from March 15, 2010 to August 9, 2010"
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DEUTSCHE BANK AG,
Defendant.
JOINT MOTION AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STAY AND HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Judge: Hon. Larry Alan Burns
Courtroom: 9
Complaint Filed: July 10, 2009
Trial Date: None Set
Kirby Noonan Lance & Hoge LLP 350 Tenth Avenue, Suite te 1300 San Diego, Cali fornia 92101 -8700 Pursuant to Southern District of California Local Rules 7.1(g) and 7.2, Plaintiff Patriot Scientific Corporation ("Patriot") and Defendant Deutsche Bank AG submit the following joint motion to: (1) continue the stay of this action that was issued pursuant to this Court's Order Granting Motion to Stay; and Order Re: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss, dated December 4, 2009 (the "Order") [Doc. No. 20]; and (2) continue the hearing date and briefing deadlines on Deutsche Bank AG's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) ("Motion to Dismiss") that is currently set for March 15, 2010 pursuant to the Order. WHEREAS, the Order granted a stay based on the pending FINRA arbitration between Patriot and certain entities related to Deutsche Bank AG that was, at the time of the Order, scheduled for hearing on January 11, 2010. WHEREAS, based on the agreement between the parties, the FINRA hearing was recently rescheduled to June 8, 2010. Accordingly, in the interest of efficiency for the Court and the parties, the parties, through their respective counsel of record, jointly move the Court to issue an order:
1. Continuing the stay of this action until July 1, 2010; and
2. Continuing the hearing date on Deutsche Bank AG’s Motion to Dismiss (and related briefing deadlines) from March 15, 2010 to August 9, 2010 or some other convenient date for the Court that falls after the stay of the action is lifted.
DATED: March 1, 2010
KIRBY NOONAN LANCE & HOGE LLP
By:
/s/ Julianne Hull
Charles T. Hoge
Julianne Hull
Attorneys for Plaintiff PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION
DATED: March 1, 2010
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP
By:
/s/ Peter Yu, Jr.
Peter Yu, Jr.
Attorneys for Defendant DEUTSCHE BANK AG
Zusammenfassung des Inhalts: Es gibt keinen Grund für eine erneute Überprüfung - alle Fragen sind in den bisherigen reexaminations bereits geklärt.
Press Release Source: Patriot Scientific Corporation On Wednesday March 3, 2010, 8:00 am
SAN DIEGO, March 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Patriot Data Solutions Group, Inc. ("PDSG"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTC Bulletin Board:PTSC.ob - News), announced today that it is introducing the next generation of its Crossflo DataExchange® suite that takes bold new steps toward the goal of automating data sharing, accelerating standards-based initiatives, reducing related costs and preserving legacy investments.
The U.S. law enforcement community is a collection of more than 18,000 separate federal, state and local and tribal agencies with independent jurisdictions, governance structures and information systems. Information sharing strategies have been thwarted by the multiplicity of existing systems and entities, the increasing sophistication of criminal activity and a lack of coordinated efforts to address these barriers at any large scale. The new release of Crossflo DataExchange helps resolve these challenges. New components include:
CDX ExchangeBuilder - designed to generate NIEM* conforming IEPDs, significantly reducing the cost and time it takes to build IEPDs**.
CDX Portal – a secure, end-user interface for justice personnel. Built upon the Global Federated Identity and Privilege Management (GFIPM) framework, the CDX Portal enables agencies to control and manage access to an exchange's applications and data services. These data services can include federated queries of information residing in disparate data sources driven by CDX, or services driven by third party applications already owned by agencies.
These new tools perfectly complement PDSG's enterprise-class middleware and data mapping tools to offer a complete data exchange solution suite. The combination of the new CDX ExchangeBuilder, proven CDX mapping and information exchange platform, and new CDX Portal will enable agencies to meet information sharing challenges from the initial planning stages, through implementation, and throughout the entire life-cycle of the exchange.
"Life-cycle management of IEPDs and information exchanges is a critical part of the process that is often overlooked by customers and other vendors. In the past, the myriad of data definitions, systems and standards requirements has been a challenge for our customers, consuming considerable time and resources, even before any implementation can begin," said Brian Mooney, Sr. VP Operations with PDSG. "Crossflo DataExchange was specifically designed to address our customers' needs for a more efficient way to share data across jurisdictional boundaries, and achieve the first step toward true data integration automation. It will alleviate the need to have NIEM-specific knowledge and expertise, can reduce the time needed to develop IEPDs by more than 50% and will enable our customers to independently manage and update their IEPDs over time."
The Crossflo DataExchange® is a fully integrated suite of tools, but customers can decide if and when they wish to add individual modules, so an affordable solution can be configured for each client's specific needs. This will enable agencies of different sizes, with different resources, to choose between a tool such as CDX ExchangeBuilder to design IEPDs, a CDX DataExchange base package for a standard exchange, or a CDX DataExchange enterprise solution to enable large scale exchanges incorporating CDX Portal and multiple data services.
About PDSG
Patriot Data Solutions Group, Inc. ("PDSG") provides products and solutions that enable mission-critical applications to significantly accelerate the time to value and reduce total cost of ownership for their data-sharing initiatives. The company's flagship product, the Crossflo DataExchange® solution, helps link systems together and facilitates secure data sharing for any information exchange initiative in the public safety and criminal justice markets. The solution has been designed to work directly with a number of national data sharing standards, including NIEM (National Information Exchange Model), and the Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM) and HL7 (Health Level 7). PDSG also offers Vigilys, a software product that leverages data accessed by CDX and provides a shared, map-based, common operating picture that allows field based first responders and office based emergency managers the ability to visualize incident responses and collaborate in real-time. PDSG's technological innovation is backed by subject matter expertise and proven methodologies, facilitating the rapid exchange of actionable data in mission-critical applications such as clinical quality improvement and emergency services response management.
PDSG has been working with some of the nation's earliest and most innovative data exchange projects including one of the most advanced statewide data-sharing initiatives to be deployed in the United States. PDSG is the data-sharing group of Patriot Scientific Corporation, which is headquartered in Carlsbad, California (OTC BB:PTSC.ob - News). For more information on Patriot Data Solutions Group, visit www.pdsg.com.
* The National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) was designed to develop, disseminate, and support enterprise-wide information sharing standards and processes across the whole of the justice, public safety, emergency and disaster management, intelligence, and homeland security enterprise at all levels and across all branches of government.
**An IEPD, or Information Exchange Package Documentation, is a specification for a data exchange and defines a particular data exchange. For example, there is an IEPD that defines the information content and structure for an Amber Alert, a bulletin or message sent by law enforcement agencies to announce the suspected abduction of a child.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, patent litigation, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Contact:
Kim Larkin
Larkin Communications for PDSG
Office: (703) 250-3590, x102
Mobile (202) 391-5205
klarkin@larkincomm.com
jetzt war neureich schneller -;)
New Pacer--CASE TRANSFERRED OUT ELECTRONICALLY
posted on Mar 05, 10 01:45PM
New Pacer--CASE TRANSFERRED OUT ELECTRONICALLY from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of New
York to the United States District Court − Northern District of California (tro) (Entered:
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley Square)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:09−cv−04083−NRB
Sirius XM Radio Inc. v. Technology Properties Ltd et al
Assigned to: Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald
Cause: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement
Date Filed: 04/24/2009
Date Terminated: 02/17/2010
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 830 Patent
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
02/17/2010 Ï 40 ORDER: For the reasons stated at a conference held on February 17, 2010, the defendants' motion to dismiss on the basis of improper venue pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3) is denied, and their motion in the alternative to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) is granted. The case shall be transferred forthwith to the Northern District of California. (Signed by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on 2/17/2010) (jfe) (Entered: 02/17/2010)
02/17/2010 Ï CASE TRANSFERRED OUT ELECTRONICALLY from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of New York to the United States District Court − Northern District of California (tro) (Entered: 02/18/2010)
CARLSBAD, Calif., March 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) announced today Arcelik A. S. has purchased a Moore Microprocessor Patentâ„¢ (MMP) Portfolio license from The TPL Group.
About the MMP Portfolio
The Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio contains intellectual property that is jointly owned by the privately-held TPL Group and publicly-held Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) . The MMP Portfolio includes seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts. It is widely recognized that the MMP Portfolio protects fundamental technology used in microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs), embedded processors and system-on-chip (SoC) devices. Manufacturers of microprocessor-based products can learn more about how to participate in the MMP Portfolio Licensing Program by contacting: mmp-licensing@alliacense.com.
About Patriot Scientific (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%)
Headquartered in Carlsbad, California, Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) provides data sharing and secure data solutions for a connected world. Patriot Scientific (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) addresses the expanding market opportunities in the healthcare, justice and public safety industries through its wholly owned subsidiary Patriot Data Solutions Group, Inc. These growth activities are funded with revenues generated, in a large part, from the continuing successful Moore Microprocessor Patentâ„¢ Portfolio licensing partnership with The TPL Group. Patriot Scientific (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) 's integrated core intelligence solution addresses the critical data/information sharing needs of the healthcare industry, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and federal, state, and local public safety and law enforcement agencies. For more information on Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC:$0.14,00$-0.008,0-5.41%) , visit: www.ptsc.com.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, patent litigation, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Contact:
Patriot Investor Relations
ir@ptsc.com
760-547-2700 ext. 102
New Pacer--STIPULATED REQUEST TO DISMISS THE SECOND CLAIM OF PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT REGARDING U.S. PATENT NO. 5,784,584 AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
HTC CORP., and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED, PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, and ALLIACENSE
LIMITED,
Defendants.
STIPULATED REQUEST TO DISMISS THE SECOND CLAIM OF PLAINTIFFS’
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT REGARDING U.S. PATENT NO. 5,784,584
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON
WHEREAS plaintiffs HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “HTC”) filed a First Amended Complaint seeking a declaratory judgment that HTC did not infringe any valid and enforceable claim of U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584 (“’584 patent”); WHEREAS defendants Technology Properties Limited, Patriot Scientific Corporation, and Alliacense Limited (collectively “TPL”) filed an Answer denying HTC’s averment that HTC did not infringe any valid and enforceable claim of the ’584 patent but did not assert a counterclaim based on that patent; WHEREAS, in the related action, Barco N.V. v. Technology Properties Limited, et al., Case No. 08-05398 JF, TPL moved to dismiss the ‘584 patent and proffered a covenant-not-tosue. Based on the covenant, the Court granted TPL’s motion to dismiss the ‘584 patent on February 19, 2010; WHEREAS TPL has offered and hereby provides to HTC a covenant-not-to-sue with respect to the ’584 patent, which is reproduced in its entirety below; and WHEREAS in light of TPL’s covenant-not-to-sue, HTC has agreed to dismiss its declaratory judgment claim as to the ’584 patent on the terms set forth below; NOW, THEREFORE, TPL and HTC, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate, and respectfully request that the Court order, as follows: 1. TPL has provided the following covenant-not-to-sue to HTC, which the Court hereby approves: Technology Properties Limited and Patriot Scientific Corporation, each on behalf of itself and any successors-in-interest to U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584 (“the ’584 patent”), hereby unconditionally and irrevocably covenant not to assert at any time any claim of patent infringement including direct infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducing infringement against HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “HTC”) under any claim of the ’584 patent as they currently read, and any claim in any reissued or reexamined version of the ’584 patent that is the same as, or substantially identical to, any claim of the ’584 patent as it currently reads, against any products made, used, offered for sale, sold, or imported into the United States by HTC currently or at any time prior to the date of this covenant. 2. In light of TPL’s covenant-not-to-sue with respect to the ’584 patent, the Second Claim of Declaratory Judgment Regarding the ’584 Patent in HTC’s First Amended Complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 3. The dismissal provided by this Order does not limit the parties’ ability to continue to prosecute its remaining claims, defenses, and counterclaims in this litigation regarding U.S. Patent Nos. 5,809,336; 6,598,148; 5,440,749; and 5,530,890. This dismissal also does not limit any rights by the parties to subsequently seek recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED.
Dated: March 15, 2010
FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP
By: /s/ John L. Cooper
John L. Cooper
Attorneys for Defendants
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED and ALLIACENSE LIMITED
Dated: March 15, 2010
KIRBY NOONAN LANCE & HOGE
By: /s/ Charles T. Hoge
Charles T. Hoge
Attorneys for Defendant
PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION
Dated: March 15, 2010
COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP
By: /s/ Kyle Chen
Kyle Chen
Attorneys for Plaintiffs HTC Corp. and HTC America, Inc. I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a “conformed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.
Dated: March 15, 2010 /s/ John L. Cooper
John L. Cooper
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
1. TPL has provided the following covenant-not-to-sue to HTC, which the Court hereby approves: Technology Properties Limited and Patriot Scientific Corporation, each on behalf of itself and any successors-in-interest to U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584 (“the ’584 patent”), hereby unconditionally and irrevocably covenant not to assert at any time any claim of patent infringement including direct infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducing infringement against HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “HTC”) under any claim of the ’584 patent as they currently read, and any claim in any reissued or reexamined version of the ’584 patent that is the same as, or substantially identical to, any claim of the ’584 patent as it currently reads, against any products made, used, offered for sale, sold, or imported into the United States by HTC currently or at any time prior to the date of this covenant. 2. In light of TPL’s covenant-not-to-sue with respect to the ’584 patent, the Second Claim of Declaratory Judgment Regarding the ’584 Patent in HTC’s First Amended Complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 3. The dismissal provided by this Order does not limit the parties’ ability to continue to prosecute its remaining claims, defenses, and counterclaims in this litigation regarding U.S. Patent Nos. 5,809,336; 6,598,148; 5,440,749; and 5,530,890. This dismissal also does not limit any rights by the parties to subsequently seek recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs.
DATED: ___________________
NOT SIGNED
Honorable Jeremy Fogel
United States District Court Judge
Moore glaubt das der Streit mit TPL bald beendet sein könnte, da viel passiert ist.
CARLSBAD, Calif., April 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTC Bulletin Board:PTSC.ob - News) today reported the filing of its report on Form 10-Q for its third fiscal 2010 quarter ended February 28, 2010.
For the three and nine month periods ended February 28, 2010, the Company's revenues were $0.2 and $0.3 million, respectively, compared to $1.4 million and $4.6 million, respectively, for the same periods in the prior fiscal year. The decrease in revenues is primarily attributable to the May 2009 deconsolidation of Holocom, Inc., and its exclusion from the consolidated operating results. Results from Patriot's investment in the MMP™ portfolio of microprocessor patents, a joint venture with Phoenix Digital Solutions, LLC (PDS) and The Technology Properties Limited Group (TPL), were $0.4 and $3.9 million in earnings, respectively, for the three and nine-month periods ended February 28, 2010, and a $0.9 loss and $5.7 million in earnings, respectively, for the same periods in the prior fiscal year.
For the three and nine month periods ended February 28, 2010, the Company's net loss totaled $0.9 and $5.7 million, respectively, compared to a $1.5 million net loss and net income of $0.8 million, respectively, for the same periods in the prior fiscal year. At February 28, 2010 the Company's cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaled $16.0 million.
The May 2009 change in the manner in which the Company's investment in Holocom is accounted for had no impact on the Company's net operating results for all fiscal periods presented.
"This has been a period where we've enjoyed some accomplishments as well as encountered some new challenges," stated Cliff Flowers, Patriot's interim CEO.
In February, PDSG successfully launched several new product offerings, including the Crossflo DataExchange® (CDX) Connect for N-DEx. This product is believed to be the first and only commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) solution available to enable data sharing between the FBI's N-DEx database and other agencies, allowing the sharing of information across jurisdictional boundaries and providing new investigative tools that enhance the nation's ability to fight crime and terrorism. Built on the CDX platform, CDX Connect for N-DEx has been successfully deployed, linking the New Jersey State Police Data Exchange (NJ-DEx) with the FBI's N-DEx.
Also launched in February, the CDX 4 Enterprise suite makes significant strides towards automating data sharing, accelerating standards-based initiatives, reducing related costs and preserving legacy investments. Included for the first time with the CDX 4 Enterprise suite are the CDX ExchangeBuilder, which facilitates the design of data exchanges with unprecedented efficiency, and the CDX Portal, which provides agencies with a single point of access to all data sources aggregated by CDX. With over 18,000 separate federal, state, and local law enforcement communities in the U.S., PDSG is positioned to be a significant provider of the critical infrastructure needed to increase interagency communication and coordination.
The Company is continuing to undergo a review of the PDSG subsidiary and hired Attain, LLC (formerly Eclat Consulting, LLC) to provide comprehensive business services. Most recently, these services have focused on expanding the reach of PDSG through identification and development of strategic partnerships capable of providing access to new customer opportunities. This initiative has opened a broader market for PDSG within Federal, State and Local Government.
PTSC's 10-Q also reports that during the February quarter the Company reaffirmed its commitment to the MMP™ portfolio of microprocessor patents by providing two loans totaling $1,950,000 to TPL. One of the loans issued currently is in default causing the Company to take a charge to earnings of $1,000,000 plus interest in the event of its non-collection, while at the same time the Company has asserted certain offsets to amounts claimed to be due TPL but are otherwise in dispute. The Company is working aggressively to resolve this issue and to provide for the resumption of productive license activity from the MMP™ portfolio.
The Company expects to file its next annual report on Form 10-K on Monday, August 16th, 2010.
About Patriot Scientific Corporation
Headquartered in Carlsbad, California, Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC) provides data sharing and secure data solutions for a connected world. These activities are funded with revenues generated, in a large part, from the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ Portfolio licensing partnership with The TPL Group. For more information on Patriot Scientific Corporation, visit: http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/...amp;anchor=www.ptsc.com&index=1
About Patriot Data Solutions Group, Inc.
Patriot Data Solutions Group, Inc. ("PDSG") provides products and solutions that enable data-sharing initiatives. The company's flagship product, the Crossflo DataExchange® solution, helps link systems together and facilitates secure data sharing. The solution has been designed to work directly with a number of national data sharing standards, including NIEM (National Information Exchange Model), and the Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM). PDSG's technological innovation is backed by subject matter expertise and proven methodologies, facilitating the rapid exchange of actionable data.
PDSG is the data-sharing group of Patriot Scientific Corporation, which is headquartered in Carlsbad, California (OTCBB:PTSC.ob - News). For more information on Patriot Data Solutions Group, visit http://www.pdsg.com/.
About the MMP™ Portfolio
The Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio contains intellectual property that is jointly owned by the privately-held TPL Group and publicly-held Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB: PTSC - News). The MMP Portfolio includes seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts. It is widely recognized that the MMP Portfolio protects fundamental technology used in microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs), embedded processors and system-on-chip (SoC) devices. Manufacturers of microprocessor-based products can learn more about how to participate in the MMP Portfolio Licensing Program by contacting: mmp-licensing@alliacense.com .
About Attain, LLC
Based in Vienna, Va., Attain is a professional services company comprised of innovative problem solvers who deliver tangible results to address today's complex public sector challenges. With approximately 200 employees, Attain delivers strategic, operational support, healthcare solutions, and IT security and application services to more than 125 customers in the Federal, state and local government, higher education and nonprofit markets.
For more information about Attain, please visit http://www.attain.com/.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, patent litigation, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Contact:
Patriot Investor Relations
ir@ptsc.com
Contact Information Here
Contact Name
Contact Company
Contact Title
email@address.com
www.company.com
Contact Information Here
Contact Name
Contact Company
Contact Title
email@address.com
www.company.com
Forward email
Allerdings ist das alles wenig wichtig. Einzig der Abschluß bei USPTO und dem deutschen Patentamt hiflt unserem
Share wieder auf die Beine.
hätte ich nochmal einige stücke jetzt dazu gekauft........
aber so leider nicht......
http://secfilings.nasdaq.com/...K&RcvdDate=4%2F13%2F2010&pdf=
Press Release Source: Patriot Scientific Corporation On Monday April 26, 2010, 7:48 pm EDT
CARLSBAD, Calif., April 26 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTC Bulletin Board:PTSC.ob - News) today reported that on April 22, 2010 it filed an action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara against Technology Properties Limited, LLC (TPL), the Company's joint venture partner in the management of the MMP™ portfolio of microprocessor patents, and Alliacense, LLC, the licensing division of TPL.
On April 26, 2010 the Court ordered the papers on file to be provisionally sealed. The Court will conduct a formal hearing on this issue on May 20, 2010 at which time Patriot will have an opportunity to oppose TPL's motion to seal. TPL's Motion to Compel Arbitration will be heard on that day as well. Patriot's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction is scheduled for hearing on June 1, 2010.
On April 20, 2010 the Management Committee of PDS passed resolutions specifying that (i) any and all future licenses of the MMP Patent Portfolio must be approved in writing by a majority of the members of the Management Committee before they are agreed to or signed by TPL and (ii) effective immediately, TPL must not market patent portfolios in which PDS does not have an interest with the MMP Patent Portfolio. The TPL representative on the PDS Management Committee voted against the resolutions, and TPL has not expressed its acquiescence to the resolutions.
On April 12, 2010 Patriot filed suit in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego against TPL alleging contractual breach on a $1 million note receivable for which repayment was due Patriot on February 28, 2010.
About Patriot Scientific Corporation
Headquartered in Carlsbad, California, Patriot Scientific Corporation (PTSC) provides data sharing and secure data solutions for a connected world. These activities are funded with revenues generated, in a large part, from the Moore Microprocessor Patent™ Portfolio licensing partnership with The TPL Group. For more information on Patriot Scientific Corporation, visit: http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/...mp;anchor=www.ptsc.com&index=1.
About the MMP™ Portfolio
The Moore Microprocessor Patent Portfolio contains intellectual property that is jointly owned by the privately-held TPL Group and publicly-held Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB: PTSC – News). The MMP Portfolio includes seven U.S. patents as well as their European and Japanese counterparts. It is widely recognized that the MMP Portfolio protects fundamental technology used in microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs), embedded processors and system-on-chip (SoC) devices.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this news release looking forward in time involve risks and uncertainties, including the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow, market acceptance risks, patent litigation, technical development risks, seasonality and other risk factors detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Contact:
Patriot Investor Relations
ir@ptsc.com
760-547-2700 ext. 102
Gesamtzitat:
Patriot Scientific Corporation Files Complaint against The TPL Group
CARLSBAD, Calif., April 26, 2010--(PR Newswire)-Patriot Scientific Corporation (OTCBB: PTSC - News ) today reported that on April 22, 2010 it filed an action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara against Technology Properties Limited, LLC (TPL), the Company’s joint venture partner in the management of the MMP™ portfolio of microprocessor patents, and Alliacense, LLC, the licensing division of TPL.
On April 26, 2010 the Court ordered the papers on file to be provisionally sealed. The Court will conduct a formal hearing on this issue on May 20, 2010 at which time Patriot will have an opportunity to oppose TPL’s motion to seal. TPL’s Motion to Compel Arbitration will be heard on that day as well. Patriot’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction is scheduled for hearing on June 1, 2010.
On April 20, 2010 the Management Committee of PDS passed resolutions specifying that (i) any and all future licenses of the MMP Patent Portfolio must be approved in writing by a majority of the members of the Management Committee before they are agreed to or signed by TPL and (ii) effective immediately, TPL must not market patent portfolios in which PDS does not have an interest with the MMP Patent Portfolio. The TPL representative on the PDS Management Committee voted against the resolutions, and TPL has not expressed its acquiescence to the resolutions.
On April 12, 2010 Patriot filed suit in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego against TPL alleging contractual breach on a $1 million note receivable for which repayment was due Patriot on February 28, 2010.
Meine Übersetzung des wesentlichen Inhaltes (siehe unten nochmal zitiert):
.. und ab sofort, darf TPL kein Patent-Portfolio mehr vermarkten, an dem PDS kein Interesse (im Zusammenhang) mit dem MMP Patent-Portfolio hat.
Hintergrund offenbar: TPL verkauft seine Patente (nicht zum MMP gehörige) (an "unsere" Lizenznehmer) und PTSC zahlt dafür.
.... and (ii) effective immediately, TPL must not market patent portfolios in which PDS does not have an interest with the MMP Patent Portfolio. The TPL representative on the PDS Management Committee voted against the resolutions, and TPL has not expressed its acquiescence to the resolutions.
Dazu die Zusammensetzung des Management Commitees:
von wolfpack
http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1370291#message
und noch eine schöne Analyse von wolfpack - lesenswert!
http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1370287#message
At one time I was in the opinion TPL was going to do a merger, or some another type of take over of PTSC. Now, as I've looked into the PDS by-laws, and who controls PDS, I've changed my mind. Why should TPL expend any money for PTSC. They have complete control of the "MMP" through PDS, and Alliacense now. Once you have full control of the money flowing into PDS, and also, full control of paid expenses and the profit/loss of proceeds for a 50/50 split, the game is over. Remember, these three members of the "Management Committee" who runs PDS is comprised of an Independent manager "Robert K. Neilson" who is also Senior Vice President of TPL (COO), and is also President of PDS. "Dan Leckrone", Chairman of TPL is the other member of the Management Committee, and "Carlton Johnson" representing PTSC, and he currently serves as legal counsel for Roswell Capital Partners, and has served as legal counsel for Equiplace Securities, (Formerly Swartz Investments.) It only takes two of three managers to be present for a meeting of the "Management Committee" to establish a quorum for the transaction of business. Remember, this "PDS Corporation" originally was set up for the purpose of sharing all proceeds 50/50 with PTSC, unfortunately this has not been the case. The only thing going for PTSC now is what's on hand of the remaining cash, excluding the 5-mil for student loans, and the in-house treasury shares they hold since the end of February, 2008 for a possible M/A. (IMO) Carlton Johnson made the decision to replace Turley with Groerner, because Turley was a lose cannon, and could not be manipulated in what was transpiring at PDS. This all happened in December, 2007 when they announced the settlement with the J-3 that's when all communications with shareholders was reduced, and then it was game, set, match. Corrections welcome.
vom 05.12.2008
wolfpackvolt
http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1370334#message
Patriot entwickelt "Rückgrat", besser spät als nie
http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1370333#message
Endlich! (unternimmt Patriot etwas)
http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forums/discussion/...s/1370338#message