Infringement Suit Against Nanosys Stayed as PTAB Reviews Patent Validity
U.S. District Judge Richard Andrews in Wilmington, Delaware, ordered “administratively closed” the year-old complaint alleging Nanosys produces quantum dot materials using processes that infringe an NNCrystal patent on nanocrystal manufacturing (see 1907150019). The case was stayed Aug. 25 after Nanosys…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
successfully petitioned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for an inter partes review (IPR) into its contention that NNCrystal’s invention was unpatentable. The parties should promptly notify the court when the PTAB review is complete “so that this case may be reopened and other appropriate action may be taken,” said Andrews’ order (in Pacer) posted Monday in docket 1:19-cv-01307. PTAB instituted the IPR Aug. 18, finding preliminarily that Nanosys “established a reasonable likelihood of prevailing” in its argument that the NNCrystal patent should be thrown out. “Our final decision will be based on the record as fully developed during trial,” it said. PTAB’s decision to launch the IPR “validates our position” that NNCrystal lacks any “valid Intellectual Property assets to enable it to participate in the market we have created,” emailed Nanosys CEO Jason Hartlove Tuesday. “It is a critical step towards the ultimate dismissal of the case against us.” NNCrystal didn’t comment.