NTP Patent Rejected in Final Judgment
The United States Patent and Trademark Office said that it had found one of the five wireless e-mail patents owned by NTP invalid, and issued a final rejection notice to the patent holding company on Wednesday. The agency had previously rejected all five of NTP's patents in non-final rulings.
No further details about the decision were initially available. The patent was one being cited in an ongoing infringement case involving NTP and BlackBerry maker Research In Motion.
With the USPTO appearing to act expeditiously in the matter, it seems NTP will have little ground to stand on when the company meets RIM in a court hearing Friday. At the hearing, U.S. District Judge James Spencer is expected to decide whether an injunction that would shut down the BlackBerry service in the U.S. can be applied.
RIM, however, has said that it plans to release a software workaround that would allow the service to continue to operate. Details of the workaround were released on February 9. While NTP contends that the workaround may still violate the law, RIM has said the software has already been vetted for any legal issues.
NTP had successfully sued RIM in 2003 over failure to pay for the rights to use some of its patents. An injunction was issued that would have shut down the service, although it was stayed pending an appeal.
Late last year, Judge Spencer indicated he was tiring with the case and intended to move quickly. He added that he would not enforce a $450 million settlement the two sides had initially agreed upon before talks fell apart last summer.
The final rejection of the patent is by no means an end to the case. NTP said it intends to see a reexamination process through to the end, which could take years. The company would also have the opportunity to challenge the decision in a federal court.
"This Final Office Action maintains the outright and complete rejection of all claims in the patent," RIM said in a statement. "All of the NTP patents have been rejected by the Patent Office in initial and second Office Actions, based in part on prior art not considered in the 2002 trial in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia."
NTP was unavailable for comment.