Having won nearly $1 billion from Apple in a series of patent trials, VirnetX has appealed several inter partes review decisions invalidating network security patents that Apple was found to infringe, arguing that the reviews may still be unconstitutional despite the recent U.S. Supreme Court’s upholding of an administrative review process that allows those engaged in patent lawsuits to more easily invalidate questionable IP, reports Law360.
Enacted by Congress in 2011, the law established a system called inter partes review, under which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is able to review, and in some cases invalidate, patent claims. It could be bad news for VirnetX, which is, let’s face it, a “patent troll.”
On April 11 a jury in the lawsuit-friendly Eastern District of Texas ruled that that Apple infringed four VirnetX network security patents and ordered the tech giant to pay $502.6 million in damages. In January 2014 VirnetX Holding Company, an Internet security software and technology company (and, by most considerations, a “patent troll”) filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas seeking to supplement its infringement contentions against Apple, the defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit.
The motion alleged that Apple products, including products containing the redesigned VPN On Demand and Per App VPN features implemented in Apple’s iOS, continue to infringe VirnetX’s patented inventions.
By the way, a patent troll is an individual or an organization that purchases and holds patents for unscrupulous purposes such as stifling competition or launching patent infringement suits. In legal terms, a patent troll is a type of non-practicing entity: someone who holds a patent but is not involved in the design or manufacture of any product or process associated with that patent.
Like this article? Consider supporting Apple World Today with a $5 monthly Team AWT membership.
