- Adaptix Files New 337 Complaint Regarding Certain Wireless-Communication Base Stations
- January 29, 2013 | Authors: Eric W. Schweibenz; Thomas C. Yebernetsky
- Law Firm: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office
On January 24, 2013, Adaptix, Inc. (“Adaptix”) filed a complaint requesting that the U.S. International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.
The complaint alleges that Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson and Ericsson, Inc. (collectively, the “Proposed Respondents”) unlawfully manufacture, import, sell for importation, and sell after importation certain wireless communications base stations and components thereof used in those systems that infringe at least claims 1, 2, 4, 9, 13-16, 20, 21, 31, 32, 34, and 41 of U.S. Patent No. 6,870,808 (the ‘808 patent).
According to the complaint, the ‘808 patent relates generally to techniques for increasing the amount of data that may be transmitted per time period for a given frequency band between a base station and mobile-subscriber units. Adaptix states that the approaches embodied in the ‘808 patent were adopted by the wireless-communication industry when the 4G LTE standard was released. Adaptix asserts that the Proposed Respondents unlawfully manufacture, import, sell for importation, and sell after importation certain wireless communications base stations and components thereof used in those systems that infringe the ‘808 patent. Specifically, Adaptix states that the RBS 6000 family of base stations infringe the ‘808 patent.
Regarding domestic industry, Adaptix avers that Adaptix and its licensees have made “significant investments in plant and equipment, significant employment of labor or capital, and substantial investments in exploitation of the patent including engineering, research and development, and licensing.” Adaptix acknowledges that “[its] business has changed over the years, from developing and manufacturing wireless-communications access technology to licensing and enforcing patents in that technology.”
As to related litigation, the complaint states that Adaptix has asserted the ‘808 patent in seven related litigations. All seven related litigations were filled in the Eastern District of Texas between January 13, 2012 and January 10, 2013. Included in the seven related litigations is a pending case against the Proposed Respondents, and others, which was filed on January 10, 2013.
With respect to potential remedy, Adaptix requests that the Commission issue a permanent limited exclusion order and a permanent cease and desist order directed at the Proposed Respondents.