Strategy in TECH...
A jury has come to a unanimous verdict in the matter of Sonos, Inc. vs. Google, LLC, a patent infringement lawsuit initially filed on September 22, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for California Northern District in San Francisco. In the case of one of the two patents under consideration – the ‘885 patent – the jury sided with Sonos, finding that Google products did infringe upon the Sonos patent and awarded them a judgment of $32.5 million.
In a result likely to be viewed by many as anti-climatic, U.S. District Judge James V. Selna has declared a mistrial in the matter of the $1.8 billion trade secret lawsuit between Masimo Corp. et al vs. Apple Inc. et. al. And while I am sure that both sides are disappointed that they failed to prevail, both can take away some positive elements from this null decision that will most likely inform their approach in a new trial.
In more late-breaking news from the Masimo v. Apple trade secrets trial, we learn that U.S. District Judge James V. Selna has cut Masimo’s trade secrets claims in half, down from twelve initial claims to now six viable claims. Based on the expert estimated value of the claims cut, that takes this case from one valued at $3.1 billion in damages to one now valued at $1.8 billion.
The Masimo Corporation $3 billion trade secret misappropriation, patent infringement, and patent ownership trial against Apple, Inc. is continuing and witnesses are offering the jury sharply divergent views of the many elements of this case. While those opposing viewpoints are fairly clear, what is not clear is how the jury is interpreting all of this information, and which side they feel is presenting a true picture of the situation.
On the eve of the upcoming patent trial in the matter of Sonos, Inc. [Nasdaq: SONO], vs. Google, LLC [Nasdaq: GOOG], both parties had submitted motions for summary judgment trying to win as many points as possible while also clearing away as many outstanding issues as possible to limit the number of factual matters to be determined at trial by a jury. It has been a long and winding road to get to this point, but one thing seems clear to me, Sonos may have gotten more than they bargained for, as this action with Google, their largest adversary by far, appears to have taken a bit of a toll.
Last week, a major patent trial began in Southern California as Masimo Corp. vs. Apple Inc. kicked off. And already big stories are flowing out of the proceedings that, for several days now, were entirely or partly conducted in complete secrecy, as Masimo executives testified behind closed doors.
As I write this post on Wednesday, it is the opening day of the patent infringement and trade secrets trial based on a lawsuit filed by Masimo Corporation [NASDAQ: MASI] and Cercacor Laboratories, Inc. (a Masimo-affiliated company) versus Apple, Inc. [NASDAQ: AAPL]. You could call it David vs. Goliath, as tiny Masimo tangles with Apple, the largest corporation in the world. This lawsuit was originally filed back in January 2020 by Masimo who claims that Apple has misappropriated trade secrets by hiring former Masimo employees and stealing Masimo patented technologies, valuable intellectual property (IP) they consider trade secrets, for use in Apple products.
On Tuesday, less than two weeks after the conclusion of a trial in the case of ClearPlay, Inc. vs. Dish Network where a jury found in favor of ClearPlay and ordered Dish Network to pay $470 million for patent infringement – Judge David Nuffer announced a new ruling that throws out the jury verdict and award. This dramatic turnabout was announced during a court status hearing on Tuesday in which the parties participated via Zoom.
Dish Network, LLC must pay nearly $470 million for patent infringement related to its Autohop Hopper technology that a Salt Lake City District Court jury says infringes on patents held by ClearPlay Inc. The case, originally filed as ClearPlay, Inc. vs. Dish Network LLC, Dish Network Corp., EchoStar Corp., and EchoStar Technologies L.L.C. has been a long-running battle as it was originally filed in March 2014.
Masimo (NASDAQ: MASI), a medical products manufacturer who also owns audio products maker Sound United, said this week that a U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) Administrative Law Judge in Washington D.C. has ruled that Apple, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) has violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by importing and selling models of their Apple Watch that incorporate light-based pulse oximetry technology that infringes on two of Masimo’s patents. Apple first introduced its pulse oximeter sensor in their Apple Watch Series 6 in 2020 and continues to incorporate it into models up to the current series.
