Update: USPTO Orders Re-exam of Second Mission Abstract Patent . . .
. . . and the broadcasters have notified the Delaware judge of the USPTO orders
When last we visited the Mission Abstract Data (MAD) fracas, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had ordered that one of MAD’s patents be re-examined. (That would be Patent No. 5,629,867.) Two days later, a similar order was issued with respect to the other patent (i.e., Patent No, 5,809,246) that MAD is relying on in its efforts to convince radio licensees to sign up with MAD for the right to utilize technology that MAD claims is covered by those patents. (If you’re new to L’Affaire Mission Abstract, you might want to check out our previous posts on the subject, which may be found at this link.)
We’ll leave the process of dissecting the USPTO’s orders to the patent mavens although, as we previously observed, those orders are probably not welcome news chez MAD.
By contrast, the USPTO orders were probably greeted with open arms by the broadcasters who MAD sued in U.S. District Court in Delaware. They have wasted no time in bringing the orders to the court’s attention in a supplement to their opposition to MAD’s motion to lift the stay which is currently in place, effectively freezing the litigation. (Note that copies of the two USPTO orders are included as attachments to that supplement.) As we suggested in our previous post, the fact that the patents underlying MAD’s lawsuit are being re-examined could convince the judge in the lawsuit to keep the case on ice a little while longer (i.e., probably at least until the USPTO review is resolved). Why, after all, would the court insist on forcing the parties through extensive litigation about alleged patent infringement if the patents in question are still being re-examined?
If we were betting bloggers, we’d guess that the next thing we’ll see will be a response from MAD to the court, probably trying to explain why the USPTO re-examinations shouldn’t make any difference. Check back here for updates.
Has anyone heard of any updates to the litigation?
Tim -
Not a lot of action recently. The pending court case against the larger broadcasting companies remains stayed. The last entry of any kind in the Federal Court system's Pacer database is from August 29 and that's a filing updating the court on the filing of the second reexamination requests with the USPTO (which asks the USPTO to again review the underlying patents). Not having seen anything to the contrary, we assume those reexamination requests are still pending at the USPTO. But we haven't had direct contact from anyone at Mission Abstract Data/Digimedia in some time either.