RSSNTP Fires Back at RIM, Trademark Office
By Ed Oswald | Published February 23, 2006, 1:20 PM
A day ahead of a hearing that could decide the future of BlackBerry service in the United States, patent holding company NTP broke its silence on Thursday. The company said it was doing so to address "mischaracterizations" of the validity of its patents.
NTP also went so far as to accuse the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office of wrongdoing in the process where all five of its patents involved in the Research In Motion (RIM) case have been rejected in preliminary judgments. One of those patents was ruled invalid in a final judgment handed down Wednesday.
"Any initial determinations by the PTO are subject to review by the PTO Board of Patent Appeals, and if necessary, by the federal court system," the company said in a statement. "The federal court system, including the Court of Appeals which previously upheld NTP's patents, is the final arbiter in the matter."
NTP also accused both RIM and the USPTO of potentially violating the law. It claims that with documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act requests, it discovered that RIM's lobbyists have been in contact with the Office, and the two parties have had "undisclosed communications."
Furthermore, it accused the Canadian government and its Ministry of Industry of attempting to meddle in United States affairs by getting the patents reviewed.
But perhaps in what could be seen as the most egregious of NTP's claims, the company alleges that the USPTO took advantage of the death of its founder, Thomas Campana. The company complained that the Patent Office dragged its feet after NTP requested the agency act on reexamination quickly after learning of Campana's illness.
"Despite Patent Office assurances that actions were imminent, the Patent Office delayed -- without explanation -- until long after Mr. Campana's death to finalize their review of the NTP patents," the company said. It added that the agency admitted Campana could have addressed some of the issues arising from the patent fight.
"The Patent Office now essentially takes the position that its failure and promise to act earlier does not now make its current rulings unfair," NTP added.
Nonetheless, the company said it has confidence that a USPTO appeals board would correct the "serious mistakes" of the patent examiners and rule in its favor. NTP added it would later "correct" the appeals board decision in the courts if need be.
In the end, the patent holding company claims it is only seeking fair proceedings. "Permitting patent reexaminations to be influenced by lobbying efforts of a losing willful infringer destroys fairness in the patent system for any and all companies," it concluded.
NTP and RIM will meet in a court hearing on Friday.
By denying the request of the U.S. govt to enjoin the case, they handed the U.S. govt the right to appeal and impose an injunction block until their issues are addressed. If the courts deny that approach, they can file for another appeal or request an executive order by the president. If that fails, the U.S. govt can invoke the 'takings' clause and sieze the patent under imminent domain as it pertains to national security. That clause has never been invoked however, so it will be interesting to see if/how it works. Also, the takings clause requires the loser to be compensated at "fair market value", which is determined by the new owner and does not delay the siezure, which is effected immediately.
Man, this is almost as entertaining as watching the Olympics (maybe more entertaining) :)
Score: 0
|I think it is high time to take NTP Inc to the gallows! This corrupt parasite is nothing more than a opportunist. Like the other parasites out there, it does nothing useful except to use the courts to rob others who are actually doing something with their talent.
Score: 0
|I just wish I was a lawyer for either side. They're the ones making all the money off this.
A total waste of process.
Score: 0
|I think that NTP has no right to speak whatsoever. They are patenting a concept, which is a clear abuse of the patent system.
Score: 0
|It would be interesting to see the opinions, legal and public, on this issue if both companies were American.
Score: 0
|