Patent Attorney, Lawyer Law Firm. Handling Patent Prosecution & Litigation Cases

Patent Infringement Dispute: Java FX Developer Oracle is Less Than Enthused with Google’s Android Software

Oracle Corporation (Oracle) filed the patent infringement lawsuit against Google in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Oracle’s complaint seeks monetary damages for willful infringement. Along with an injunction to immediately halt Google from building and distributing the Android Smartphone.

Wiki describes Oracle Corporation as a multinational computer technology corporation that specializes in developing and marketing enterprise software products — particularly database management systems.

The Android is Google’s premier Internet and social media Smartphone. Google’s use of open source code, on top of (and based off of) Oracle’s different Java codes, for use in running and writing applications for the Android operating system on its Google Android Smartphone, allegedly infringes on patented Java technologies.

Oracle’s complaint alleges that Google’s use of Java code source and applications opens Google up to liability for partial-infringement of seven different Oracle owned patents.

The complaint also alleges that Google knows, or should have known, of these different infringements because Google hired former Sun Java engineers to work in developing the Android operating system.

If you have a patent issue, or wish to register a patent, you may contact one of our patent attorneys for a free evaluation or call 866.936.7447 (International Toll Free).

Patent Lawyer Update: Federal Circuit Examines Intent to Deceive Factor for Falsely Marked Goods in Pequignot

35 U.S.C. § 292 provides a powerful tool for enforcing patent rights against infringers who falsely mark a good as patented or patent pending when it is not actually patented or pending. § 292 provides that any person may sue for the penalty against infringers falsely marking a good as patented, where such infringers “shall be fined not more than $500 for every such offense.”

Along with the false marking element, § 292 also requires that the marking of an unpatented good is done with intent to deceive the public. Closely connected with the second § 292 element, liability for patent infringement requires that the infringer had notice of the infringement and ignored such notice.

An easy way for a valid patent owner to satisfy the notice requirement is to mark each patented good with the appropriate issued patent numbers. However, valid patent owners must take care in marking the goods so as not to open themselves up to § 292 patent infringement liability by mismarking a patented good or, conversely, by marking an unpatented and non-pending good as patented.

If you have a patent issue, or wish to register a patent, you may contact one of our patent attorneys for a free evaluation or call 866.936.7447 (International Toll Free).

Active Inducement of Patent Infringement

35 U.S.C. 271(b) provides:

Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.

Specific Intent

Liability for active inducement of infringement requires specific intent – that the inducer’s actions induced direct infringement and that he knew or should have known his actions would induce actual infringements.  DSU Medical Corp. v. JMS Co., Ltd., 471 F.3d 1293, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (en banc), citing, Manville Sales Corp. v. Paramount Systems, Inc., 917 F.2d 544, 554 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see also Cross Medical Products, Inc. v. Medtronic Sonfamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“that the alleged infringer knowingly induced infringement and possessed specific intent to encourage another’s infringement”)

Contributory Infringement of Patent Rights

35 U.S.C. § 271(c) provides:

Whoever offers to sell or sells within the United States or imports into the United States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, shall be liable as a contributory infringer.

How do you determine if someone is infringing a patent?

Patent infringement is a two step legal analysis.  First, the claims of the patent are construed to determine, as a matter of law, what they mean.  Claim construction, or the meaning of the patent claims, is generally determined by review of intrinsic evidence pertaining to the patent.  Intrinsic evidence includes the patent itself (claims, specification, drawings), the file history comprising records of the prosecution of the patent before the U.S.P.T.O, prior art made of record during the prosecution, and file history records of any related patent applications claiming common priority to the patent at issue.  If claim meaning cannot be determined by the intrinsic evidence, extrinsic evidence may be considered.  Extrinsic evidence may include technical dictionaries or treatises contemporary in time to the priority date of the patent and relevant to the particular field or industry, industry use, prior art patents, evidence of what one of ordinary skill in the relevant field knew and/or inventor or expert testimony. 

Patent Infringement Attorneys: Patent Infringement Defenses and Counterclaims

When faced with allegations of patent infringement, an accused infringer may raise various defenses recognized by the Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. § 282.  First, an accused infringer may raise non-infringement as a defense – arguing that the accused product does not meet the language of the patent claim(s) at issue.  Patent invalidity is another defense recognized by the Patent Laws - that the patent does not meet the statutory criteria for patentability set out in 35 U.S.C. §101 et seq.  Patent unenforceability may be a further defense in a patent suit – that the patent is not enforceable due to equitable reasons, such as inequitable conduct during prosecution of the patent.  Defenses in patent cases are fact specific, depending upon the particular patent-in-suit, accused device, pre-suit actions of the patent holder and pre-suit interactions between the parties.  Other defenses or counterclaims sometimes raised in patent infringement litigation may include patent misuse, unclean hands, estoppel, laches, Walker Process antitrust claim, or procedural defenses based upon the pleadings.

If you have a patent issue, or wish to register a patent, you may contact one of our patent attorneys for a free evaluation or call 866.936.7447 (International Toll Free).

Patent Enforcement Attorney Discusses the Difference between Patent Infringement vs. Patent Invalidity

Patent infringement is the unauthorized making, using, offering for sale, or selling a patented invention within the United States, or importing a patented invention into the United States.  The patent claims determine the scope of what the patent covers.  Patent infringement is a two step inquiry: (1) what do the patent claims mean; and (2) comparison of the patent claims to the accused device.  The meaning of the patent claims is determined by the court in a claim construction or Markman proceeding.  Then the construed claims are compared to the accused device to determine whether the accused product infringes the patent.  Infringement occurs when every claim limitation of a patent claim is met literally, or by equivalents, by the accused device.