• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bit more info on NVidia/Samsung/Qualcomm lawsuit

NTMBK

NTMBK

Lifer
Zanovar said:
I just cant take that guy seriosouly about anything.does anyone.
Click to expand...
I can't either. But in this case the important bits (that NVIDIA withdrew a bunch of complaints) are properly sourced, so that much is correct. This answers why the ITC ruling only dealt with 3 patents.
NTMBK said:
Looks like perhaps they weren't confident that these ones wouldn't get invalidated on further scrutiny from the USPO. I'm not a lawyer though, anyone got any insight?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's the USPO doing the scrutinizing. Just the US ITC. In any case the cited document doesn't say why NVIDIA withdrew their claims (only that it wasn't something NV and Samsung had agreed to in a backroom deal) so that's speculation on Charlie's part. The ITC allowed it as there was no reason to deny it, and it made the case simpler.
 
Last edited:
I'm not following this case to closely, any info on a counter suite? If Samsung/Qualcomm can win this, they better have a good counter measure.
 
NTMBK said:
Charlie over at S|A dug up an interesting document, looks like NVidia pulled a bunch of their claims over the summer: http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/337/337_932_notice09012015sgl.pdf

(Charlie's story at http://semiaccurate.com/2015/10/12/nvidia-patent-licensing-devastated-itc-ruling/ )

Looks like perhaps they weren't confident that these ones wouldn't get invalidated on further scrutiny from the USPO. I'm not a lawyer though, anyone got any insight?
Click to expand...

Plaintiffs are the so-called "masters of the case" since they bring the complaint and alleged the wrongdoings. A plaintiff can withdraw their claims in certain circumstances. Here it looks like nVidia is withdrawing claims/patents from their ITC complaints because they dont want to get an invalidity adjudication on them. That, or they settled/crosslicensed for that claim. No plaintiff = no case. By extension, no claims = no complaint = no action.

Most forums will grant these withdrawals because they have very full dockets and they dont do extra work unless there are special circumstances that say they should.

Before people in this thread get their panties in a wad, every single major US corporation does stuff like this. This is how litigation works. Its gamesmanship, trickery, strategy, playing chicken. Patent litigation is called the sport of kings for a reason because its even more complicated. But every company that gets sued or sues regularly does stuff like this in the products liability field, unfair competition, trademark, patent, title vii, you name it. There is and always will be gamesmanship.
 
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-nvidia-samsung-elec-usitc-idUKKBN0TY0B120151215

A U.S. trade body on Monday upheld its earlier decision that rejected Nvidia Corp's claims of patent violation by Samsung Electronics Co and Qualcomm Inc over use of Nvidia's graphics chip technology.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) decided not to review an initial order by an administrative law judge on Oct. 9 as it found no violation of Nvidia's patents related to graphics-processing chips. (1.usa.gov/1QpISQc)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top