June 7, 2019
Authored and Edited by Brandon T. Andersen; Sydney R. Kestle; Elizabeth D. Ferrill
In Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC v. Nanya Tech. Corp., No. 2018-1581 (Fed. Cir. May 30, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision that the plaintiff lacked “all substantial rights” and therefore could not assert the patent on its own, but it vacated and remanded for the district court to consider whether joinder of the original patentee was feasible.
Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) was originally assigned the asserted patents. AMD executed an agreement that purported to transfer “all right, title and interest” in the patents to Lone Star. That agreement, however, placed limitations on Lone Star, such as: (i) Lone Star could only assert the patents against “Unlicensed Third Party Entities” listed in the agreement; (ii) new entities could only be added if both Lone Star and AMD agreed to them; (iii) if Lone Star sought to sue an unlisted entity, AMD reserved the right to offer that entity a sublicense; (iv) AMD could prevent Lone Star from assigning the patents or allowing them to enter the public domain; (v) AMD and its customers could practice the patents; and (vi) AMD shared revenue Lone Star generated through its monetization efforts. Id. at 4.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s determination that the limitations in the agreement prevented the transfer of “all substantial rights” in the patents, and that Lone Star accordingly lacked the ability to assert the patents on its own. The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded, however, finding Rule 19 required the district court to consider whether joinder of AMD was feasible.
Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
Workshop
Life Sciences Workshop: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law
May 2, 2024
Cambridge
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
April 19, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.