Third Party in Immersion-Sony Dispute Presses On With Court Battle
Sony Computer Entertainment (SCE) last month ended a long court fight with touch-feedback technology company Immersion (CED March 5 p6) but Consumer Electronics Daily learned Wed. that a 3rd party in the case vowed to fight on, seeking its share of the settlement. Immersion and SCE America (SCEA) didn’t respond to requests for comment by our deadline.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Internet Services said a deal it signed with Immersion in late 2000 assigning it “exclusive rights” to rumble technology used in “age-restricted games” made it a co- plaintiff in the case, entitling it to a cut of damages awarded Immersion (CED Oct 4 p3). Internet Services paid $800,000-plus to Immersion through early Oct. under a “broad license” deal they signed, according to court papers filed by Internet Services.
Immersion sued Sony for infringement, claiming popular PlayStation DualShock controllers and other PlayStation and PS2 products violated Immersion patents. In Sept., a Cal. jury ruled for Immersion, awarding it $82 million in damages (CED Sept 23/04 p11). A federal district court judge later entered judgment in favor of Immersion, adding $8.7 million in damages, raising the award to $90.7 million (CED March 29/05 p2). Sony appealed, but last month it and Immersion issued a joint statement saying they “agreed to conclude their patent litigation” at the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, and “entered into a new business agreement to explore the inclusion of Immersion technology in PlayStation format products.” Sony will pay Immersion the full district court award, they said.
The appeals court ruled Wed. that Internet Services “cannot pursue further recovery from Sony based on the same alleged acts of infringement” of Immersion patents 6,275,213 and 6,424,333. The court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the claims between Internet Services and Sony.
The Dist. Court also dismissed Internet Services’ cross claims against Immersion, ruling that Internet Services needed standing to sue Sony as a co-plaintiff with Immersion to maintain the cross claims against Immersion. But the appeals court rejected the district judge’s “rationale” for that ruling “to the extent that it required” Internet Services to “have standing to sue for patent infringement as a prerequisite to recovering on its contract claims against Immersion.” Because the district judge dismissed Internet Services’ contract claims without prejudice, Internet Services is “free to file any claims arising under the licensing agreement” with Immersion “in the appropriate forum,” the appeals court ruled.
Internet Services intends to do just that, an attorney representing the company told us Wed. “We will be pursuing our claims against Immersion for our share of the judgment” because the appeals court “clearly rejects the District Court’s reasoning and… makes it clear that we have the right to sue under the license agreement for our share of the judgment,” said Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford Law School.