There may be an undercurrent in patent regulation as of late that litigation favors the defendant. Quite than contending infringement of some claims of 1 patent, plaintiffs are actually suggested to say a number of claims throughout a number of patents. After 35 U.S.C. § 101 challenges, IPR filings, and abstract judgment motions, plaintiffs are fortunate if they’re left with a number of claims of 1 patent to carry to trial. Analogies have been made that patent portfolios are like Swiss cheese.
However sometimes, a patentee wins massive, giving the viability of patent assertion campaigns a much-needed shot within the arm.
To that time, patent holder VLSI has received a whopping $2.175 billion jury verdict within the Western District of Texas. VLSI is the proprietor of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,523,373 and seven,725,759. Declare 1 of the ‘373 patent includes figuring out the minimal working voltage of a reminiscence and storing this worth in non-volatile reminiscence. Two voltage sources are offered, and the second is chosen to function the reminiscence if the primary is beneath the minimal worth. Declare 14 of the ‘759 patent includes a programmable clock controller that may obtain a request from a primary gadget coupled to a variable clock frequency bus. The controller then modifications the frequency of a high-speed clock that’s used to manage the clock frequency of a second gadget coupled to the bus in addition to the bus itself. Each patents purport to scale back the facility consumption of chips.
The jury discovered that Intel actually infringed claims 1, 5, 6, 9, and 11 of the ‘373 patent, and infringed claims 14, 17, 18, and 24 of the ‘759 patent beneath the doctrine of equivalents. The jury additionally discovered that this infringement was not willful and that Intel had failed to determine anticipation of ‘759 patent (the validity of the ‘373 patent was apparently not at situation).
All stated, the jury discovered Intel on the hook for $1.5 billion as a result of its infringement of the ‘373 patent and $675 million for its infringement of the ‘759 patent. The principle justification for damages of this magnitude is that Intel has offered billions of units infringing the patents.
VLSI is a non-practicing entity, which Intel tried to make use of towards it at trial. These efforts fell on deaf ears, however together with the 10-figure sum is more likely to drive the continuing “patent troll” narrative.
That is the second largest patent infringement verdict ever, and it is going to be the biggest if it holds. A $2.5 billion award to Idenix Prescription drugs in 2016 was overturned on invalidity grounds. Right here, an Intel attraction is inevitable, so VLSI won’t be counting its cash any time quickly.