Subscribe to Updates in Legal, Economic & Regulatory Affairs

RSS By Email

RSS By RSS

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Subscribe in Bloglines


The Expertise Imperative and Compliance Technology
Access to a diverse array of specialized expert inputs drives superior decisions in every organizational context: within corporations, by investors and consultancies, and within nonprofits. When decision makers are confident of their decision inputs, they can respond more quickly and creatively to challenges and opportunities.Learn more about GLG's Compliance Framework


This page may include content provided by Council Members, your access to which is subject to the Terms of Use.
Find Out More

June 26, 2008

What Next for Tessera?

This analysis is solely the work of the author. It has not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Analysis By:
Douglas Lichtman, Professor of LawDouglas Lichtman
Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles
Implications: With the '419 patent now back for another few months of patent review, Tessera has a clean shot at two big legal events: resolution of the Amkor arbitration, and an initial decision from the ITC.  The scary part: almost everyone seems to expect that TSRA will win both.

Analysis: Tessera has been riding a rollercoaster of legal news the last many months, with headlines out of the ITC and the PTO both causing sharp movement in the stock and public perception as well.  This summer, two more big events loom: the end of the Amkor arbitration, and an initial decision from the ITC.

The Amkor arbitration has thus far been something of a black box.  Could Amkor be challenging TSRA's patents on grounds of validity?  Maybe.  And obviously similar challenges are working (for now) at the Patent Office.  But such a strategy seems unlikely because, to beat a patent in arbitration, Amkor would have to carry a heavy evidentiary burden -- much heavier than the one in play at the Patent Office.  That leads me to think that the real fight here is probably a fight about royalties (probably which products are covered by the contract, and which not) rather than about the patents per se.  Put differently, this is about how much Amkor owes, not whether Amkor owes.

The ITC hearing has similarly been a somewhat quiet affair.  This time, the reason is that almost all of the juicy arguments and documents remain under seal.  That said, we know that the ALJ in the fight originally thought that the case should be frozen until the PTO finishes its review; and now that the case is back, against his better judgment, one wonders how he will look at the patent validity issues in the case.  After all, although he is not allowed to defer to the Patent Office's views, he certainly will remember them as he does his work. If he found the analysis convincing enough last time to freeze the case, is it possible that he will hear similar arguments this time and again find them convincing -- this time enough to invalidate the patents as part of his own investigation?


Report a Concern

GLG News: What Experts Think Is Important





Analytics


Generated at 2008-12-03T09:45:16.743