|
Post by newyorkled2008 on Sept 6, 2012 22:08:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by newyorkled2008 on Sept 6, 2012 22:12:59 GMT -5
Remaining 8 patents the ownership of which has been disputed betw. Apple and Kodak:Taken from Pages 7 & 8 of the non-Downloaded filing: www.kccllc.net/documents/1210202/1210202120619000000000002.pdf U.S. Patent No. 7,936,391 (the “‘391 patent”), entitled “Digital Camera with Communications Interface for Selectively Transmitting Images Over a Cellular Phone Network and a Wireless LAN Network to a Destination,” was issued on May 3, 2011. It names as its inventors Messrs. Parulski, Ward, and Allen, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. The ‘391 patent is a continuation of application No. 11/692,224, filed on March 28, 2007, which is a continuation of application No. 09/783,437, filed on February 14, 2001, which is a division of application No. 09/004,046, filed on February 7, 1998. U.S. Patent No. 7,742,084 (the “‘084 patent”), entitled “Network Configuration File for Automatically Transmitting Images From an Electronic Still Camera,” was issued on June 22, 2010. It names as its inventors Messrs. Parulski, Ward, and Allen, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. The ‘084 patent is a continuation of application No. 09/783,437, filed on February 14, 2001, which is a division of application No. 09/004,046, filed on January 7, 1998. U.S. Patent No. 7,453,605 (the “‘605 patent”), entitled “Capturing Digital Images To Be Transferred to an E-Mail Address,” was issued on November 18, 2008. It names as its inventors Mr. Parulski, Mr. Ward, and Michael C. Hopwood, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. The ‘605 patent is a continuation of application No. 09/821,152, filed on March 29, 2001, which is a continuation of application No. 08/977,382, filed on November 24, 1997. U.S. Patent No. 7,210,161 (the “‘161 patent”), entitled “Automatically Transmitting Images from an Electronic Camera to a Service Provider Using a Network Configuration File,” was issued on April 24, 2007. It names as its inventors Mr. Parulski, Joseph Ward, and James D. Allen, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. The ‘161 patent is a continuation of application No. 09/004,046, filed on January 7, 1998. U.S. Patent No. 6,879,342, entitled “Electronic Camera with Image Review,” was issued on April 12, 2005. It names as its inventors Messrs. Miller and Lourette, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. U.S. Patent No. 6,441,854, entitled “Electronic Camera with Quick Review of Last Captured Image,” was issued on August 27, 2002. It names as its inventors Mr. Lourette, Mr. Miller, Peter Fellegara, Linda M. Antos, and Robert H. Hibbard, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. U.S. Patent No. 6,147,703, entitled “Electronic Camera with Image Review,” was issued on November 14, 2000. It names as its inventors Michael Eugene Miller and Richard William Lourette, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent. U.S. Patent No. 5,828,406, entitled “Electronic Camera Having a Processor for Mapping Image Pixel Signals into Color Display Pixels,” was issued on October 27, 1998. It names as its inventors Messrs. Parulski and Tredwell, and lists Kodak as the assignee of the patent.
|
|
|
Post by microking on Sept 7, 2012 5:31:05 GMT -5
Nice DD NY, Maybe logik360 can chime in on the years allowed to challenge an issued patent. Patent 391 is very interesting. It's a continuation of 3 other patents issued in 07, 01, and 98.
|
|
|
Post by psalmchapter51 on Sept 7, 2012 7:54:08 GMT -5
News of Judge Gropper allowing Kodak to sell contested patents will give EK a nice boost heading into 9/19 final sale hearing.
Pending judgement on these remaining 8 contested patents may have had something to do with the final sale hearing delays.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 7, 2012 7:56:43 GMT -5
Morning Psalm!
You may be right!
And I may be crazy buddy!
SBG
|
|
|
Post by newyorkled2008 on Sept 7, 2012 7:58:14 GMT -5
Or it just might be a lunatic we're looking for?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 7, 2012 8:42:19 GMT -5
Check out the dates- ALL past statute of limitations I think. SBG
|
|
|
Post by psalmchapter51 on Sept 7, 2012 9:24:57 GMT -5
Check out the dates- ALL past statute of limitations I think. SBG Moreover, the remaining 8 patents which Apple/Flashpoint have been contested will be ruled on next WED. Even though these patents are old, Apple/Flashpoint have been contesting Kodak's sole ownership thereof for a reason. Past infringements perhaps? Again, the final sale hearing may have been delayed pending outcome of next week's ruling.
|
|
|
Post by newyorkled2008 on Sept 7, 2012 9:48:22 GMT -5
""will be ruled on next WED.""
Next Wed or next Friday?
'and it's merely Kodak's request for Summary Judgement. Whether or not the Honorable Judge Gropper will rule is another story. Although I'm sure Kodak's done all that was requested by the good judge.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|