Never A Dull Moment

Hello all,

We are back after a little break in June. It IS summer after all and, judging by all the out of office messages we are getting these days, you may read this on July 25^th or August 25^th. Either way, we’re here to catch everyone up on some of the recent movement in the IP market including a few interesting stories that are worth turning our attention to.

In this issue, we touch on a few more major patent verdicts from this past month alone, including one for almost $1 billion, BigTech’s increasing challenges to ITC jurisdiction, the last bastion of hope for patent owners in the US, the UPC’s continued role as the forum of choice for patent enforcement, the latest numbers on patent transactions and other newsworthy developments. Read below.

As usual, as I focus on the macro picture in this newsletter, I want to remind everyone that we track everything that is going on in this world and for those who need their regular dose of news, once again you can follow me on either LinkedIn or Twitter where I post almost daily about some of the most newsworthy events. 

Happy reading!

 Louis

__________________

Tangible IP News

In our last column, we mentioned that we successfully brokered multiple voluntary licenses to a network communications patent portfolio including voluntary licenses with two Fortune 500 companies. We are currently in the closing stages of at least two other portfolios and hope to make formal announcements shortly.

We just sent to market a very interesting portfolio that pertains to digital content analysis. It boasts 11 assets and no fewer than 21 separate claim charts reading on various companies well known to the IP community. If you want to receive a copy of the materials, please email Erika Warner at erika@tangibleip.biz.

We also have several other portfolios for sale that offer great opportunities to savvy buyers. All of our patents for sale are listed here. Similarly, if you’d like to be added on our distribution list in the future so that you are the first to receive new opportunities, please email us at info@tangibleip.biz.

__________________

Patents Wanted

Call for high quality portfolios!

We are always open to reviewing high quality portfolios. Some of the areas of most interest to our buying network right now include:

• Semiconductor
• Handset/laptop
• Wireless wifi5/6
• Network security
• Medical device
• Network hardware
• Imaging
• Battery
• Lights/led
• Automotive
• Display
• IoT

You can review our criteria here but if you own a patent portfolio with at least five issued US patents and have knowledge of others using your technology (infringement), we are happy to review for potential brokerage. We will also look at larger portfolios where evidence of use is uncertain.

Please reach out to info@tangibleip.biz with any assets that may match these requests.

__________________

Recent News:

Renewed Litigation Between Competitors

To most of us, the last decade has appeared to be a self-imposed “patent peace” between large competitors. The reality, however, may be more closely correlated to trust issues in the US institutions tasked with supporting legitimate patent infringement claims than some kind of legal restraint. At least, this is what recent activity between operating companies before the Unitary Patent Court (UPC) in Europe suggests, as we are now seeing a flurry of new cases brought before the UPC by household names such as Huawei and First Solar, to name just a few. We predict this trend will continue as long as patent owners feel they can get a fair shake in court, a quick resolution and injunctive relief when necessary, all current attributes of the UPC. Unfortunately for small patent owners who tend to only protect their invention in the US, the UPC development remains of little assistance to them. Help will need to come from US institutions themselves.

More Large Awards

In our latest column, we noted the large number of significant patent verdict awards of 2024 to date. Although those are usually a positive indicator of the health of the patent market as they may instill *some* fear in serial infringers, the reality is, they have their limit, the same way a blue worker winning the Powerball does not mean the middle class is suddenly looking to brighter prospects.

Nevertheless, they are still better than a kick in the teeth and we saw two more large verdicts in the past weeks only, one for over $100M against Amazon and one for a whopping $847M against Verizon. Both will likely be appealed, possibly overturned and almost certainly reduced. But they should serve as a reminder that there is some level of accountability for infringing on other people’s IP.

On the Hill

In this regard, it is interesting albeit not at all surprising that we are seeing even more frontal attacks in the US on the last agency standing that can really punish patent infringers, namely the Internal Trade Commission (ITC). I will remind our readers that the ITC -despite its moniker- is an US agency whose mission is to protect US companies against illegal imports, which includes counterfeit goods and those who infringed US patents, as long as some “domestic industry” test is met. Once it is seized with a formal complaint, it will investigate and can adjudicate on patent infringement cases. Although it cannot grant damages (plaintiffs have to file in district court for that) it can issue an “exclusion order”, which is the closest thing to injunction and block infringing goods from being imported/sold in the largest market of the world. This creates leverage for patent owners that they have lost since the eBay decision did away with injunctions. We also saw this in the Massimo v. Apple saga a few months ago which I discussed at length in a previous column.

Well, BigTech is now lobbying Congress aggressively to curb the ITC power based on the specious arguments that 1) it is wreaking havoc in their manufacturing operations (which it can’t if the goods are not imported) and 2) that it is duplicative of the district court system (we just explained that it is not). A public hearing at the House IP sub-committee on July 23 put this latest attempt on full display. BigTech’s complaints were so egregious that Representative Thomas Massie, who is sympathetic to the small inventors’ plight lost his temper during the hearing stating: “I’m appalled that you guys are here testifying like this, this is shameless…. What you’re saying is if you’re only stealing 10% of the product, let us keep importing it, let us just keep stealing it.”  

Even if the impact of the ITC can be major in some cases (Apple, after much screaming and lobbying the White House, simply disabled a subpar feature in its Apple watch to satisfy the exclusion order), two wrongs do not make a right and weakening the ITC power would simply make the US even more irrelevant when it comes to patent enforcement, a trend we are already squarely seeing.

But we are not done, and you have to give the infringement lobby an “A” for effort; just a few weeks ago, the same House sub-committee, held a hearing examining recent developments with respect to IP litigation financed by third-party (TPLF) investors and foreign entities and their potential impact on the country’s IP system and national security. Several witnesses were on stand representing interest groups normally associated with implementers and one even argued that “TPLF fundamentally corrupts the courts by converting them into a speculative market, by leveraging the court as an investment vehicle for private gain”. The event culminated with an announcement by committee Co-chair Darrell Issa (R-Ca.) that he intended to soon release draft legislation requiring disclosure of third-party litigation funding (TPLF). Indeed, a discussion draft of that bill was unveiled on July 11 that would make it even more difficult to fund patent cases. This is important because litigation funders help reestablish some balance between the usual disproportionate means of a small inventor enforcing his or her patents against large defendants with deep pockets. The usual tactic of making the plaintiff spend all of its limited resources well before the case reaches trial does not work when funders are present. Hence the attempts to remove them from the equation.

UPC Trends

We talked at length in previous columns about the flurry of activity before the UPC, driven by its rapid docket, competent panels of judges and ability to issue injunctions when necessary. It has become the forum of choice for both operating companies (see above) and NPEs alike, as shown by the latest case filed by NPE Atlantic IP against Xiaomi (a regular target) on newly acquired patents.

Interdigital vs. Lenovo: Who Won?

The IP community has followed the battle between Interdigital and Lenovo very closely these past months and the trial attracted hour by hour reporting like it was O.J.’s all over again… well kind of. At the end, the court sided with Interdigital and condemned Lenovo to pay back damages on their infringing SEP patents. The US company did not take long to tout this as a major victory. However, the royalty rate established by the UK court ended us being roughly in line with Lenovo’s calculations and far below what Interdigital had hoped. Which leaves things as a good public win for Interdigital but a disappointing decision for all SEP patent owners who will see royalty rates plummet for their innovation. In a related announcement, Interdigital reported that it has entered a world-wide licensing agreement with Google.

Nokia Branches Out

Finnish licensing powerhouse Nokia announced recently that it had signed its first licensing deal in the video streaming area. According to its Chief Licensing Officer Arvin Patel, “this strategic move not only amplifies our presence in video streaming industry but positions us to significantly tap into new market segments.”

Alice and the USPTO

For years, the USPTO had prosecution guidelines that put it at odds with the courts, specifically, its approach to 101 arguments on subject matter patentability was a bit more generous to the inventors than the courts’ jurisprudence. Not anymore, it would appear. According to a recent report, 101 rejections at the USPTO have soared, including a 77% 101 rejection rates in the AI space. With the US trying to keep its edge on AI technology, the inability to protect those with strong patents would make it a lot easier for others to simply replicate what is out there with no fear of retribution. In short, we might see the usual implementers…being implemented!

AON Leaving IP Analytics

We commented in a previous column that former CEO of AON’s IP analytics group Lewis Lee and many of his colleagues had left AON after the insurance behemoth shut down a large portion of its IP related activities. Mr. Lee’s new outfit, Washington State based Moats Metrics Inc. has announced that it has acquired the patent analytics software platform that it was previously using while at AON, which seems like the next logical step after the divestiture as AON would have no use for that platform now.

Latest Patent Market Activity

Our good friends at Allied Security Trust (AST) recently released their patent activity report for Q1 of 2024 and below are the highlights (the full report is available online):

Top Buyers:

• New NPE-IP Wave Pte Ltd bought 194 assets related to Software from NEC Corp. 4 Assets were received by AST.
• NPE-Ueran Technology LLC bought 131 Wireless assets from Huawei.
• Trina Solar Co Ltd bought 127 Semiconductor assets from JinkoSolar Holding Co Ltd.

New NPEs:

• 10 new NPEs bought 230 assets across various domains, including Communication, Electronics, Healthcare & Pharma, Industrial, Lighting, Software and Wireless

Notable transactions include:

• NPE-Whitaker Chalk Swindle and Schwartz PLLC bought 9 Healthcare & Pharma assets from Synerio.
• NPE-Viewlogic Wireless LLC bought 7 assets related to Communication from Airspace Reality and filed a litigation case against Comerica Inc. The assets were received by AST.
• NPE-Inferential Capital LLC bought 5 Software assets from NPE-IP Edge LLC and filed 3 litigations against D-Link, TCL Corp, Foxconn.
• NPE-CES Global Operations AG bought 5 Industrial assets from Cesh International Technology KFT.
• NPE-Pathway IP LLC bought 2 Lighting assets from Glowzi LLC.
• NPE-ONA Patents SL bought 2 Wireless assets from Airwave Location Technologies LLC.
• NPE-Dave Law Group LLP bought 2 Industrial assets from SourceReCycle Inc.
• NPE-SC Murray Holdings Inc bought 2 Industrial assets from The Power Collective Inc.
• NPE-BLT Patent and Law Firm bought 1 Electronics asset from Maetel Co Ltd.
• NPE-Blue Owl Capital Inc bought 1 Industrial asset from Sonnys Enterprises.

Trends:

In the first quarter of 2024, 430 deals were documented, with Software accounting for 37% of all transacted assets and Semiconductor comprising 13%. Here is the full picture:

During this quarter, Electronics companies including Foxconn, Fujitsu Ltd, Huawei, Japan Display Inc, Knowles Corp, LG, NEC Corp, Panasonic, Sensata Technologies, and Xiaomi Corp collectively sold 604 assets across 29 deals.

Simultaneously, Semiconductor companies such as Asia Pacific Microsystems, MaxLinear Inc, ON Semiconductor, Qualcomm, SK Group, STMicroelectronics NV, and TSMC were actively engaged in acquiring 262 assets through 25 deals.

Top Deals:

• NEC Corp sold 194 assets related to Software to NPE-IP Wave Pte Ltd. 4 Assets were received by AST.
• Huawei sold 131 assets related to Wireless to NPE-Ueran Technology LLC. 4 Assets were received by AST.
• Trina Solar Co Ltd bought 127 assets related to Semiconductor from JinkoSolar Holding Co Ltd.
• NexGen Power Systems Inc sold 118 Semiconductor assets related to ON Semiconductor Corp.
• Knowles Corp sold 107 Software assets to Samsung. 104 assets were received by AST.
• NPE-Daedalus Group LLC sold 85 Software assets to TSMC. 8 assets were received by AST.
• NPE-Ascend IP LLC sold 82 Software assets to another NPE-Alpha Alpha Intellectual Partners LLC. 6 assets were received by AST.
• Nokia Corp bought 70 Software related assets from AT&T. 69 assets were received by AST.