Telecom companies Ericsson, T-Mobiles & US Cellular Corporation dragged back into Patent Infringement Battle

September 8, 2018

A patent infringement lawsuit was revived against the telecom companies Ericsson, T-Mobiles and US Cellular Corporation on September 4, 2018, at the US Federal Court.

In 2014, Patent licensing corporation Intellectual Ventures accused the telecom companies Ericsson, T-Mobiles and US Cellular Corporation of infringing on four of its patents in two complaints filed at the US District Court for the District of Delaware. The 4 registered patents were: -

• Application-aware, Quality of Service (QoS) Sensitive, Media Access Control (MAC) Layer
• Optimizing Packet Size to Eliminate Effects of Reception Nulls
• Hybrid Concatenated Codes and Iterative Decoding
• Method of Baseband Frequency Hopping Utilizing Time Division Multiplexed Mapping Between a Radio Transceiver and Digital Signal Processing Resources

At the District Court of Delaware, the claims of the said patent “Application-aware, Quality of Service (QoS) Sensitive, Media Access Control (MAC) Layer” were argued on.

As per Intellectual Ventures argument, “the application type can be recognized by the resource allocator using data obtained”

However, as per the defendant's argument, resource allocator would “know the type of data application” but also “consider, when allocating bandwidth, information about applications” at a particular layer.

District Judge Leonard Stark previously passed the judgment in the favor of the defendants agreeing that, when allocating bandwidth, the resource allocator must take information obtained from a particular layer into account.

However, at the US Court of appeals for the Federal Circuit, Judge Kimberly Moore agreed with the Intellectual Ventures which claimed that Judge Stark was mistaken & his decision was based on incorrect claim construction, therefore Judge Moore stated that the plain language of the patent supports claims of the plaintiff. Therefore, Judge Moore relinquished the decision of non-infringement but rejected other claims by the plaintiff against Stark's decisions.

To visit TrademarkClick.com, Click Here.