Wearable technology increases likelihood of patent battles
Wearable technology for example, incorporates technology so unique that duplication often leads to patent lawsuits brought to the US International Trade Commission (ITC).
February 25, 2014 at 04:07 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
With the latest technology comes innovative products that not only simplify our lives, but enhance them in ways we never thought imaginable. However, with these new products also comes an unprecedented level of patent claims as battles over technology copyrights ensue.
Wearable technology for example, incorporates technology so unique that duplication often leads to patent lawsuits brought to the US International Trade Commission (ITC). Devices such as wearable glasses, smart watches and wristbands dedicated to a healthier lifestyles incorporate computing technology that is so exclusive, manufacturers big and small are easily pitted against each other regarding patent claims and litigations.
According to a recent EETimes report, the ITC has a history of being the forum of choice for patent holders in rapidly emerging markets as patent holders are likely to file suits seeking a portion of their revenues, some of which are not even active in the marketplace, also known as patent trolls.
In 2011, the ITC reached a peak of 69 cases regarding disputes over technology relating to smart televisions and smartphones. The pace has since decreased to 40+ new ITC investigations a year, but the rise of wearable computers may take the number to new heights in coming years, according to the report. The growth of wearable technology is likely to lead to disputes among a more diverse group.
“The ITC has unique attributes that are likely to attract the patent battles over wearable technology. It is known for its experience managing complex patent cases to relatively speedy resolution,” the EETimes noted. “The ITC also has jurisdiction over any goods entering the US, so it is possible to assert a patent against companies all over the world in a single complaint. It also offers the extremely potent remedy of excluding infringing devices from the US, often viewed as a death sentence in the industry.”
For the latest news in litigation claims and lawsuits in the technology sector, read these related reports:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOpenAI Hires First Compliance Chief, Snagging Uber's Scott Schools
Meta Hit With Class Action for Allegedly Using Pirated Books to Train AI Models
Trending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250