This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Patent Infringement
Obviousness Defense

K Tech Telecommunications Inc. v. Blonder Tongue Laboratories Inc. and R L Drake Holdings LLC

Published: Sep. 21, 2013 | Result Date: Aug. 29, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:12-cv-5316 Summary Judgment –  Defense in Part

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patrick F. Bright
(Wagner, Anderson & Bright PC)


Defendant

John C. McNett

Jennifer J. Moon
(Office of the Long Beach City Attorney)

Steven R. Parminter
(Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP)

William A. McKenna

Blake R. Hartz


Facts

K Tech Telecommunications Inc. filed a patent infringement against Blonder Tongue Laboratories Inc., R.L. Drake Holdings LLC, R.L. Drake LLC, and RLD '69 LLC. The disputed patents, entitled "Digital Television Translator with PSIP Update" related to the systems and methods for updating channel information in digital television signals. Both sides moved for summary judgment.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTION: Plaintiffs contended that defendants infringed on its patents.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that the disputed patents were invalid because they were "anticipated by prior invention." Defendants further contended that the disputed patents were invalid as "obvious," and were unpatentable.

Result

U.S. District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner granted defendant's motion for partial summary judgment that the disputed patents were invalid. The judge denied K Tech's motion for summary judgment. After the summary judgment decision, Plaintiff K Tech requested and received an Order dismissing its action with prejudice. K Tech has since filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where the matter is pending.


#118221

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390