• ALJ Charneski Denies Motion For Summary Determination Of No Unenforceability in Certain Personal Data And Mobile Communications Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-710)
  • April 11, 2011 | Author: Alexander E. Gasser
  • Law Firm: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office
  • On March 31, 2011, ALJ Carl C. Charneski issued the public version of Order No. 100 (dated March 23, 2011) in Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices and Related Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-710).  In the Order, ALJ Charneski denied Complainants Apple Inc. and NeXT Software, Inc.’s (collectively, “Apple”) motion for summary determination that U.S. Patent No. 6,275,983 (the ‘983 patent) is not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct.

    According to the order, Respondents HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., and Exedea, Inc. (collectively, “HTC”) opposed the motion and asserted that the ‘983 patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct based upon the non-disclosure of an operating system and 1992 manual during the ‘983 patent’s prosecution.  Although the Order was significantly redacted, it appears from the Order that for purposes of the motion, Apple did not dispute the materiality of at least the 1992 manual, and Apple alleged that HTC cannot prove that the relevant person(s) intended to deceive the Patent Office by not disclosing the operating system and 1992 manual.

    ALJ Charneski denied Apple’s motion because “it is the court’s view that the record at the present time is incomplete upon which to grant summary determination,” and he expected that at the hearing, HTC will call the relevant witness to inquire why the various materials were not disclosed to the Patent Office.