Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

How to Avoid BlackBerry Brinkmanship: Patent Re-examination Practice As a Parallel Track to Defend Patent Litigation

In <i>NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion Ltd.</i>, 270 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. Va. 2003), the jury found that Research in Motion's ('RIM's') BlackBerry' e-mail system infringes several valid claims of NTP's patents in suit. RIM did not request re-examination of the patents in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ('USPTO') until after the jury verdict was entered, and after the Director of the USPTO himself started re-examinations of five relevant patents. After the jury had finished and the USPTO had acted alone, RIM filed 14 additional re-examination requests. Several requests were filed for each relevant patent.

20 minute read September 29, 2006 at 09:38 AM
By
George Wheeler
How to Avoid BlackBerry Brinkmanship: Patent Re-examination Practice As a Parallel Track to Defend Patent Litigation

In NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion Ltd., 270 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. Va. 2003), the jury found that Research in Motion's ('RIM's') BlackBerry' e-mail system infringes several valid claims of NTP's patents in suit.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The combination of increasing operating costs and uncertain government reimbursement funding continues to place health care providers under financial pressure, and in many cases, financial distress. Given the importance of Medicare/Medicaid funding of claims under provider agreements with the federal government, how courts interpret and apply the interplay between the Bankruptcy Code and Medicare Program Act determines the disposition of hundreds of millions of dollars of claims for reimbursement that support the health care system.

April 30, 2026

As AI becomes embedded in everyday business and legal operations, organizations are confronting a new expectation: simply disclosing AI use is no longer enough. A critical shift is taking place in the legal industry: transparency is no longer just about disclosure; it’s about comprehension.

April 30, 2026