In a victory against abusive patent litigation, a Texas court has entered final judgment in favor of Universal Instruments Corporation, a subsidiary of Dover Corporation, following a three-week jury trial in Houston. All 17 claims of the asserted software patent were found invalid and not infringed. Judge Lee H. Rosenthal of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District announced the finding. The suit, filed in 2002, is one of an increasing number of patent cases that high-tech companies are facing brought by companies or individuals whose primary business model is licensing and litigation of patent assets – typically, with the assistance of contingency fee lawyers. In the Universal case, the plaintiffs alleged that the flagship GSM platform for surface-mount placement of components on printed circuit boards infringed U.S. Patent 5,283,943. The plaintiffs in the case have waived their right to appeal in return for Universal’s agreement not to seek costs or attorney fees. “Universal Instruments made a decision three years ago to take a stand and defend against this growing problem”, said Patrick J. Gillard, UIC’s CFO. “The jury’s verdict and the court’s judgment are a resounding vindication of that decision”. Often, rather than incur the high costs of defending these patent cases in court, companies opt for the cost of a settlement short of trial, even when the merits appear to be very strongly in their favor. But Universal, in consultation with its attorneys, decided to battle plaintiffs’ allegations in court and won decisively. “We have come to recognize that the cost of litigation settlements that seek to avoid the risks of a jury trial of an otherwise meritorious defense are not a good long term solution to this problem”, said Gillard. “Although it is costly in the short term to litigate one of these complex cases in front of a jury, we felt it was time to take a stand, and we did”. Gillard also noted the support it received from competitors and customers in the industry, especially Assembleon. The industry provided witnesses and evidence that supported Universal’s defense that the patent claims were invalid.
EPP EUROPE 412
Share:
