- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Review Ordered in Epson Complaint Against Ninestar
July
2007 Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd. announced that on June 29, 2007, the
United States International Trade Commission ordered review of the
initial determination rendered earlier this year by an administrative
law judge in the Seiko Epson ink cartridge investigation.Following
the administrative law judge’s initial determination, Ninestar
identified to the Commission numerous errors in the initial
determination including errors in claim interpretations and in the
infringement conclusions. Ninestar requested that the Commission
review and reverse those errors. Upon the U.S. Supreme Court’s
landmark decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (April 30,
2007), Ninestar also requested that the Commission review validity of
certain Epson patents in light of KSR’s lower standard for
obviousness. The Commission has now agreed that review of the issues
identified by Ninestar is necessary. This is the first time the
Commission has agreed to review invalidity issues using the new KSR
standard. Currently the administrative law judge’s initial
determination has no legal effect.Rusong Lu, Chairman of
Ninestar has stated, “We are extraordinarily pleased that the ITC has
accepted our petition for review and are confident that this review
will result in reversal of the errors in the initial determination.”
Mr. Lu added, “This has been a long and expensive battle for Ninestar.
We are the only respondent in the investigation to have actively
defended against Seiko Epson’s assertions. We have engaged in this
battle to protect the investment we have made in independently
developed technology as well as to protect our customers. The
Commission’s decision to review demonstrates that the confidence we
have in our position is justified.” Ninestar is represented in this
case by a team of lawyers from Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, of New
York headed by Joel Lutzker, chair of Schulte’s Intellectual Property
Department.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.