ITC Issues Initial Ruling Finding Motorola Infringes On Microsoft Patent, Motorola Views Ruling As A Reason To Celebrate
The holiday season hasn’t slowed down the International Trade Commission (ITC), as they have been busier than ever this year. Shortly after a final ruling in the HTC vs. Apple patent case, an ITC judge has made an initial ruling in a case concerning Motorola and Microsoft. The judge ruled that Motorola has infringed on four claims of Microsoft patent number 6,370,566. The patent in question relates to “generating meeting requests and group scheduling from a mobile device”. While this is just an initial ruling by an administrative judge, we’re sure to see more legal drama spill into the new year.
Oddly enough, Motorola issued a press release today celebrating the initial ruling as they were cleared from 6 out of the 7 claims against them made by Microsoft. We weren’t exactly viewing the ruling as cause for celebration in the Motorola camp, but who are we to crash a party. If you’re interested in brushing up on some strange PR, continue reading below.
Initial Determination from ITC Finds That Motorola Mobility Did Not Violate Six of the Seven PatentsDec. 20, 2011LIBERTYVILLE, Ill. – Dec. 20, 2011 – Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: MMI) (“Motorola Mobility”) today announced that it has received notice that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) in the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) action brought by Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) against Motorola Mobility has issued an initial determination. The ALJ determined that Motorola Mobility does not violate six of the seven Microsoft patents listed in Microsoft’s suit. The Company noted that Microsoft had previously dropped two patents from its original case which included nine patents.“We are very pleased that the majority of the rulings were favorable to Motorola Mobility,” said Scott Offer, senior vice president and general counsel of Motorola Mobility. “The ALJ’s initial determination may provide clarity on the definition of the Microsoft 566 patent for which a violation was found and will help us avoid infringement of this patent in the U.S. market.”
Microsoft continues to infringe Motorola Mobility’s substantial patent portfolio and Motorola Mobility has active patent infringement litigation and proceedings against Microsoft in a number of jurisdictions, including the ITC. Motorola Mobility remains confident in its position and will continue to move forward with its complaints.
The ALJ’s initial determination is subject to further review by the ITC. The final decision in this case, based on the deliberation of the full ITC, is expected by April 20, 2012. The ITC’s final determination ruling would be subject to a 60-day review period by U.S. President Obama. The Company noted that sales outside the U.S. are not within the focus of the ITC.
Business Risks
This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the impact of this litigation and future actions with respect to this litigation. Forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated in such forward-looking statements, including but not limited to the successful defense of the claims by Microsoft and protection of the company’s intellectual property; the timing of the matters before the ITC; the company’s continued ability to sell its mobile device products; and the other risks and uncertainties contained and identified in Motorola Mobility’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), any of which could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements included in this press release are made only as of the date hereof Motorola Mobility does not undertake any obligation to update the forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances or update the reasons that actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in forward-looking statements, except as required by law.
