A New Mexico Nonprofit Research Park Corporation, formed, owned, and fully controlled by the Board of Governors of the University of New Mexico ("UNM") sues Apple for patent infringement. UNM is a public education institution based in Albuquerque, New Mexico and serves as the state of New Mexico's flagship research institution. UNM serves over 25,000 students and consists of over 1,700 faculty leaders across the main campus in Albuquerque and branch campuses in Gallup, Los Alamos, Rio Rancho, Taos and Los Lunas, New Mexico.
STC.UNM promotes its mission of licensing and, if necessary, enforcement of the inventions and reinvestment continues in continued research and development and technological cooperation with UNM, in favor of and for the state of New Mexico and the United States.
Doesn't it sound noble? Certainly, but the case is that patents in this lawsuit against Apple do not originate from the University of New Mexico, but rather the "Industrial Technology Research Institute" in Taiwan. The three patents Apple is accused of violating include 8,249,204, 8,265,096 and 8,565,326.
It becomes interesting deeper into the patent package when it is obvious that a large Patent Troll named ITRI first bought patents in this lawsuit against Apple.
The lawsuit reveals that "the original patent holder of the 204 patent was the Industrial Technology Research Institute (" ITRI "), which acquired exclusive ownership of the patented invention by Wen-Rong Wu, Tzu-Han Hsu, Jen-Yuan Hsu and Pang-An Ting, registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office on February 26, 2009.
Thereafter, the SMT transferred to STC.UNM all rights, title and interest to and to 204 patents, including the right to to sue and restore past violations, by written assignment registered in the USPTO on September 1
In 2014, a Forbes report entitled" The US Supreme Court hopes to restrict patenting "was noted in part: "In one case, Taiwan's GSPT, the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), which holds just under 19,000 patents, went after LG Corporation (Korea) at the US Eastern District District Court of Texas claimed that LG had violated its backgroud nnslysmodule patents used in televisions and monitors. Finally, the court decided that LG not only violated, but that ITRI does not have an industry in the United States about articles allegedly protected by the patents in question, thereby limiting the patent's jurisdiction. Furthermore, it appears that the recent Supreme Court ruling makes it more difficult for massive nationalized trolls such as ITRI to ensure that patents they receive will remain in potential future affairs. "
Acquisition of patents and then handing them over to UNM still makes this patent infringement case one patent patent case simple and simple
Patent Trustee claims that the following Apple devices infringe their acquired patents;" Apple's iPhone 6, 6 Plus, 6s Plus , iPhone SE, iPhone 7, 7 Plus, iPhone 8, 8 Plus, iPhone X, XS, XS Max, XR, iPad Pro, iPad mini 4, Apple TV, TV 4K, iPod touch 6 gen, MacBook Air, MacBook, MacBook Pro 3rd and 4th genes, iMac 4th and 5th genes, iMac Pro 2nd genes and Mac Mini 3rd genes. "
For more details in this patent infringement case, review the full formal complaint filed with the court under, by the law of Patently Apple.
UNM V APPLE by Jack Purchaser on Scribd