Tessera Loses CAFC Patent Appeal on Minimized Chip Package
The patent infringement cases brought by Tessera Inc., over alleged infringements of minimized semiconductor chip encapsulation technologies it owns and licenses, met a further setback at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The company ‘s unsuccessful appeal followed determinations by a review panel at the International Trade Commission that for some of the alleged infringements, there was no section 337 violation, and for the remainder, the patent right did not extend to later re-sales.
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.
The appeals court conceded that some of the companies named in the infringement action used unlicensed suppliers in some instances, and that some authorized licensees were behind in royalty payments to Tessera, but nevertheless ruled in favor of the ITC, agreeing that Tessera’s technology rights were either not infringed based on the technology characteristics, or, in the case of re-sales and uses downstream from the initial licensee, were beyond Tessera’s ownership rights under the “patent exhaustion” principle.
(Opposing Tessera at the CAFC were Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc.; Smart Modular Technologies, Inc.; Acer, Inc., Acer America Corporation, Nanya Technology Corporation, Nanya Technology Corporation USA, and PowerChip Semiconductor Corporation; Ramaxel Technology Ltd.; and Kingston Technology Company, Inc.
See ITT's Online Archives or 05/24/07 news, 07052440, for BP summary of the ITC's initiation of this investigation; see ITT's Online Archives or 05/29/09 news, 09052935, for BP summary of the ITC's limited exclusion.)