PTAB

Another Sovereign Peak Ventures patent challenged

On May 3, 2021, continuing in the ongoing efforts in the SEP Video Codec Zone, Unified filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 6,877,038, owned by Sovereign Peak Ventures, a Dominion Harbor entity. The ’038 patent relates to video processing and has been asserted against LG and TCL.

View district court litigations by Sovereign Peak Ventures. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified’s Portal. Unified is represented by Raghav Bajaj of Haynes and Boone, LLP and by in-house counsel, Ashraf Fawzy, Jung Hahm, and Roshan Mansinghani, in this proceeding.

BCS Software reexamination request granted

On April 30, 2021, the USPTO granted Unified's request for ex parte reexamination, finding substantial new questions of patentability on all challenged claims on U.S. Patent 7,302,612, owned by BCS Software LLC. The '612 patent relates to a high-level operational support framework for monitoring, assessing, and managing the health of applications (or components/objects) in a distributed computing environment. The ‘612 patent has been asserted against Hewlett Packard, Elster Solutions (Honeywell), Landis+Gyr, and Itron.

View district court litigations by BCS Software. Unified is represented by in-house counsel David Seastrunk and Ashraf Fawzy.

To view any documents for the reexamination proceedings on PAIR, go to https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair, enter 90/014,709, and click on the "Image File Wrapper" tab.

GE Video Compression patent challenged

On April 30, 2021, continuing in the ongoing efforts in the SEP Video Codec Zone, Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination against U.S. Patent 6,795,583 owned by GE Video Compression LLC (GEVC). The ‘583 patent is purportedly essential to the H.265 and AV1 standards and is part of the HEVC Advance patent pool as well as SISVEL’s video codec patent pool.

Unified is represented by Theodoros Konstantakopoulos and Christian Dorman of Desmarais, and in-house counsel, Ashraf Fawzy and Jessica L.A. Marks, in this proceeding. Visit Unified’s Public Portal for more information about its Video Codec landscape (OPAL) and standard submission repository (OPEN).

To view any documents for the reexamination proceedings on PAIR, go to https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair, enter 90/014,743, and click on the "Image File Wrapper" tab.

583 GEVC Patent Ex Parte Request FINAL by Jennifer M Gallagher on Scribd

Context Directions '791 reexamination request granted

On April 29, 2021, the USPTO granted Unified's request for ex parte reexamination, finding substantial new questions of patentability on all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 10,142,791, owned by Context Directions, LLC, which is affiliated with Jeffrey Gross. The patent relates to the use of hierarchical sensor groups in mobile devices. The ‘791 patent and its family have been asserted against Samsung and LG in district court. The grant for reexamination comes exactly one month from filing.

View district court litigations by Context Directions. Unified is represented by in-house counsel Michelle Aspen and Ashraf Fawzy.

To view any documents for the reexamination proceedings on PAIR, go to https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair, enter 90/014,712, and click on the "Image File Wrapper" tab.

90014712 by Jennifer M Gallagher on Scribd

,

Unified Urges Federal Circuit to Reverse Western District's Prejudged Blanket Rule Denying Contested Stay Motions

,

On April 26, 2021, Unified, along with The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and CableLabs, filed an amicus brief in re Vulcan Industrial Holdings, a petition for mandamus of a denial of a stay by Judge Albright in light of an instituted PGR (PGR2020-00065). In the brief, amicus argued Judge Albright has clearly abused his discretion by openly adopting a rule against stays that "smacks of prejudgment." Here, Vulcan diligently filed a PGR two and a half months after the patent grant and just one and a half months after the complaint was filed, but the Court found even that aggressively early filing was dilatory, ignored the certain simplification of issues that the USPTO instituted on all claims, and applied an erroneous legal test despite clear guidance from the Federal Circuit and myriad district court rulings.

A copy of Unified’s amicus brief is provided below.