Invenvo

For the fourth time in less than three years, federal authorities have rejected a key patent worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Genentech, the South San Francisco biotechnology giant.

But it’s unlikely the decision by the USPTO regarding the so-called Cabilly patent, which deals with a technique for making antibodies and cells, will have an immediate effect on the company.

Genentech spokeswoman Caroline Pecquet said the firm’s executives haven’t seen the latest decision and haven’t determined how they will respond. But Pecquet noted that when the agency previously rejected the patent, it agreed to reconsider the matter at the company’s request.

The corporation also has the option of filing a formal appeal with the patent office and, if that fails, with the federal courts. Until all appeals are exhausted, the patent remains in effect and Genentech can continue receiving royalty payments from other firms that use the technology.

The patent - which the company obtained in 2001 and expires in 2018 - earned the company $133 million last year, according to an annual report Genentech released Tuesday.

The legitimacy of the Cabilly patent has been challenged by MedImmune of Maryland. That company pays Genentech royalties for using the technology in a drug it sells to treat respiratory diseases.

MedImmune, which has sought since 2005 to have the patent invalidated, also sued Genentech in 2003 over the dispute. That trial is scheduled to begin in June.

After Genentech announced the patent decision, its stock price fell 46 cents to close at $77.50 Tuesday.

A FIRM HAS SUED AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Sun, Raza Microelectronics and Real Networks, alleging they breach a patent it owns.

The patent in question is 6,629,163 with the inspiring name of “Methods and System for Demultiplexing a First Sequence of Packet Components to Identify Specific Components Wherein Subsequent Components are Processed without Re-identifying Components.”

Implicit Networks alleges Intel uses this patent in its Viiv technology, AMD and Raza use it in ATI and Alechemy products, Nvidia uses it in its Stant Media software, Sun uses it in its Java Media Framework, while Real uses it in its Helix DNA client.

Motorola Inc. and Hitachi Ltd. were among 34 companies accused of violating a retired Columbia University professor’s patent for light-emitting diodes and laser diodes.

Gertrude Neumark Rothschild filed the complaint today with the U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington. She is seeking to block U.S. imports of products that she says infringe the patent, including video players using Sony’s Blu-ray format, Motorola’s Razr mobile phones and Hitachi camcorders.

Companies named in the complaint include Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., LG Electronics Inc. and Samsung Group, makers of Blu-ray DVD players, as well as Toshiba Corp., which said yesterday it would abandon the HD DVD format that challenged Sony in the market for high-definition video.

Nokia Oyj, the world’s biggest mobile-phone maker, and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB, the joint venture between Tokyo-based Sony and Ericsson AB of Sweden, also were named in the complaint.

China has seen a surge in foreign-related intellectual property rights (IPR) court cases since joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001.

Domestic courts nationwide tried and concluded 668 such cases in first instance last year, compared with only 43 in 2001.

Local courts concluded 1,634 such cases in first instance during the period, an annual growth of 58 percent.

Cao Jianming, Supreme People’s Court vice president, attributed the surge to the country’s opening-up process and development of foreign trade.

IPR protection has risen in importance on China’s judiciary agenda. Since 2001, the supreme court has ordered the establishment of special courts for IPR cases nationwide and lowered the threshold to prosecute people manufacturing or selling counterfeit products.

China has staged consistent fights against piracy, destroying pirated books and DVDs in public, trading counterfeit DVDs for movie tickets and raiding factories churning out fakes.

Chinese President Hu Jintao promised the implementation of a new “national strategy” on IPR protection at the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) last October.

iVoice, Inc.  announced today it has filed an additional patent application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The application is titled: Methodology for Wirelessly Loading Speaking Medicine Containers, with an internal clock.The invention relates to speaking instruction medicine containers. The new feature includes a compliant warning having an internal clock, medicine container starting table count, required consumption data, and programming. The internal clock is started when a patient activates the audio playback start means for a first time. When a user subsequently activates the audio playback start means at a later time, the microprocessor plays back a regimen message advising the user that a predetermined number of tablets should be remaining in the medicine container at this time, and if that predetermined number of tables remaining is in excess by a predetermined amount, the patient is advised to contact a doctor or pharmacist. The microprocessor calculates current tablet count based upon the first activation, the total starting tablet count, and the tablet consumption rate data.

The Innovation Alliance is concluding that there is no pattern of runaway verdicts in patent cases based on its own survey of jury damages in 93 cases in 2005, 2006, and 2007.

The group, an alliance of technology companies and inventors, opposes passage of the Patent and Reform Act of 2007, which is currently under consideration by the U.S. Senate, and that among other things would limit damages in patent disputes.

The analysis was performed by the Paul Janicke, a professor at University of Houston Law Center, who gathered the list of jury damage verdicts and also looked at what happened after the jury returned the verdict.

The analysis found that in 47 of the 93 cases, the jury found damages of $2 million or more, but that judges did not necessarily “rubber stamp” these.

Of the 10 highest verdicts, four were set aside by the trial judge, one was found to be not supported by the evidence and a new trial was granted, one resulted in a settlement, one was affirmed, two resulted in increased awards based on the defendant’s conduct, and one remains under consideration.

Groups advocating for the patent reform act have noted a $600 million settlement in a long drawn-out battle between Research In Motion of Ontario, Canada, and NTP Inc., a Virginia-based patent holding company.

Geron Corporation (NASDAQ:GERN) was ranked number 5 of companies listed in the biotechnology patent scorecard published in the Feb. 12 issue of The Wall Street Journal. The ranking, which is based on the strength of Geron’s science as measured by the scale, quality, impact and nearness to the core science of the company’s intellectual property portfolio, reflects Geron’s dominant patent position in pioneering technologies including an anti-cancer drug and vaccine targeting telomerase and cell therapies being developed from the company’s human embryonic stem cell platform. Geron owns or licenses 34 issued U.S. patents, over 60 issued foreign patents and more than 230 patent applications that are pending worldwide in the area of human embryonic stem cells. The company owns or licenses 109 issued U.S. patents, over 170 issued foreign patents and more than 160 patent applications that are pending worldwide related to its telomerase technology. “Our expansive intellectual property portfolio is a solid foundation for our development of human embryonic stem cell-based therapeutics and anti-cancer products that inhibit or target telomerase,” said Thomas B. Okarma, Ph.D., M.D., Geron’s president and chief executive officer. “More important than the number of filings, the breadth and depth of the claim sets included in each patent application, combined with where we are in product development, protects our leadership position in two novel fields of science and medicine. We are pleased to see the significance of our work and the resulting patent filings recognized.” About Geron Geron is developing first-in-class biopharmaceuticals for the treatment of cancer and chronic degenerative diseases, including spinal cord injury, heart failure and diabetes. The company is advancing an anti-cancer drug and a cancer vaccine that target the enzyme telomerase through multiple clinical trials. Geron is also the world leader in the development of human embryonic stem cell-based therapeutics, with its spinal cord injury treatment anticipated to be the first product to enter clinical development. For more information, visit www.geron.com. This news release may contain forward-looking statements made pursuant to the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that statements in this press release regarding potential applications of Geron’s human embryonic stem cell and telomerase technologies constitute forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks inherent in the development and commercialization of potential products, uncertainty of clinical trial results or regulatory approvals or clearances, need for future capital, dependence upon collaborators and maintenance of our intellectual property rights. Actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements. Additional information on potential factors that could affect our results and other risks and uncertainties are detailed from time to time in Geron’s periodic reports, including the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007.

VoIP, Inc. announced today it has retained the BALL LAW FIRM, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, and that it intends to protect its patent from being infringed on by some of the nation’s leading Fortune 500 companies.

The Patent:       US6501837 (Telephone call connection)
The Law Firm:     BALL LAW FIRM, LLP, Los Angeles, CA
The Technology:   (Click to Call)-(Pay Per Call)

The patents protect innovations that enable “Pay-Per-Call” advertising and “Click to Call” technology, in addition to call connections between two parties initiated via a web browser. In the lawsuit, VoIP, Inc. seeks an injunction that would prevent these companies from further misappropriating VoIP, Inc.’s technology and infringing VoIP, Inc.’s patents. The lawsuit also seeks unspecified monetary damages arising from the companies’ unauthorized use of the patented technology and the continued willful infringement of VoIP, Inc.’s patents.

Based on information provided from some of the industry’s leading technology experts and the fact that this technology is being implemented at an ultra hyper rate domestically and internationally, Byron T. Ball, attorney at BALL LAW FIRM, LLP, stated, “I believe the current value of the patent could exceed 1.25 billion dollars.”

Verizon’s VoIP patents have become a lucrative source of income for the second-largest phone company in the U.S. After squeezing out $120 million from Vonage, the company has been filing patent infringement lawsuits against all comers — from tiny startups to cable giants like Cox. Today Verizon went after Charter Communications.

On the flip side, VoIP Inc., an Altamonte Springs, Fla.-based VoIP provider with a questionable business outlook, is almost out of gas. They owe Verizon about $8 million related to the settlement the two companies agreed to last year. As Fierce VoIP points out.

Unless Verizon believes in fairies, this money is as good as gone because the stock price is now at $0.008, creditors are already in the courts for big debts and VoIP Inc. is admitting it expects to have to write off its only real asset, its network business.

Convicted felon Steve Ivester was involved with VoIP Inc. during its early days when it was making a transition from tea company to Vonage competitor. Over the past 12 months, VoIP Inc.’s stock has tanked — from over $8 a share to less than a penny.

A popular Intel computer chip that is at the heart of millions of computers infringes on patented technology invented at UW-Madison, the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation claims in a lawsuit against the microprocessor giant.

In the suit filed Wednesday, WARF charges that Intel Corp. ’s popular Core 2 Duo microarchitecture infringes on a patented design that significantly improves the speed and efficiency of computer processing. The technology, patented in 1998, was developed by four UW-Madison researchers, including professor Gurindar Sohi, who is currently chairman of UW-Madison ’s computer science department.

Patent title: Table Based Data Speculation Circuit for Parallel Processing Computer
Patent number: US5781752
Filing date: Dec 26, 1996
Issue date: Jul 14, 1998
Inventors: Andreas I. Moshovos, Scott E. Breach, Terani N. Vijaykumar, Gurindar S. Sohi
Assignee: Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation

Computer industry analyst Tom Starns of Objective Analysis, a semiconductor market research firm, said the success of the lawsuit would depend upon WARF ’s ability to prove Intel used UW-Madison ’s circuit design in its product and did not come up with its own method of reaching the same result. He said that could be hard to prove.

Parallel processors such as Intel ’s allow a computer to work faster without the processor overheating, which is a limitation of prior technology.

The suit states that Intel refused attempts to license the technology.

Intel launched the Core 2 Duo microprocessors last summer. They deliver as much as 40 percent better performance while consuming as much as 40 percent fewer watts than previous models.

The suit asks for a judgment finding Intel infringed on the patent and ordering it to stop using the technology. It seeks triple damages for willful patent infringement, among other costs.

WARF is a nonprofit corporation that manages patents for UW-Madison and uses proceeds from those patents to fund research at the university.

In recent years WARF has filed nearly a dozen patent infringement lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Madison against industry giants such as IBM, Sony and Samsung. In most cases, WARF has reached out of court settlements.

Intel settled a similar case last year after trading accusations of patent infringement with Transmeta Corp. on products including Core and Pentium processors. In October, Intel agreed to pay $250 million over five years to Transmeta, also based in Santa Clara, in exchange for the right to use patented Transmeta technologies in its chips for 10 years.