Samsung

Is Micron's bid for Elpida the Deal of the Century?

Elpida Memory, Inc. (Elpida) filed for Chapter 15 protection from U.S. creditors in Delaware’s bankruptcy court on March 19, 2012, after it filed for company reorganization in the Tokyo District Court at the end of February. On July 2, 2012, Micron Technology, Inc. (Micron) announced a planned sponsorship agreement for $2.5 billion in order to purchase Elpida. An Ad Hoc group of Elpida bondholders filed a motion which objected to terms in the sponsorship agreement, stating that the agreement did not reflect the true value of Elpida.

ShareThis

In regione caecroum rex est luscus or… In the jury of the blind, Velvin Hogan is King

'If this were my patent, could I defend it?' was the question jury foreman, Velvin Hogan asked himself when considering the Apple Samsung patent infringement suit. On August 24th, 2012 a nine person jury reached the verdict which awarded Apple slightly over $1 billion in damages. This is a grievous miscarriage of justice in which Velvin played an active role. Velvin does not understand that novelty and obviousness are what determine patent validity. His public opining reinforces the widespread ignorance of the broken patent system and the myth of Apple’s innovation.

ShareThis

Apple v. Reality - Intellectual Property Analysis of Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.

In the global Battle Royale of Apple and Samsung at the International Trade Commission, Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender should receive an honorable mention as being the quirkiest judge. Referencing a scatological joke from a Cheech and Chong album , Judge Pender’s quote reflects the growing frustration of the courts with two multinational corporations who simply can’t play nice. However, what was meant as harmless commentary could overturn his decision.

ShareThis

A Hand from the Grave: Intellectual Property Analysis of Graphics Properties Holdings

On March 27, 2012, Graphics Properties Holdings, the remnant of Silicon Graphics Inc., launched a patent infringement suit against Apple, HTC, LG, RIM, Samsung, and Sony. Despite its non-operating status and troll-like activities, Graphics Properties does hold a decent patent portfolio (read: it’s not perfect, but they do hold early priority to widely used display technologies). What does this mean to these defendants, half of which are already suing each other over patent infringement?

ShareThis

End of Season Apple Sale: Intellectual Property Analysis of Apple, Inc. Patent-Related Rulings

Apple has conveniently decided to pop back into the news – and just in time for the holidays! No, we’re not talking about the coverage of Apple’s less-than-stellar Black Friday/Cyber-Monday deals. (Honestly, who can blame them for wanting to save money, since they’re funding over 20 lawsuits around the world – and that’s just with Samsung.) We’re also not talking about the U.S.

ShareThis

A Foregone Conclusion: Intellectual Property Analysis of Google’s Motorola Mobility Patent Acquisition

Motorola Mobility has a substantial quantity of uncited precedent innovation that could affect the quality of its intellectual property assets, with nine of the eighteen “stars of the portfolio” patents asserted against Apple last year appearing to be impaired. It is apparent that Google’s purchase relies on quantity over quality for its justification, as only half of their stars have much substance.

ShareThis
Distribuir contenido