Kodak Prevails in Patent Suit with Ampex.ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- Eastman Kodak Company (NYSE NYSE See: New York Stock Exchange :EK) today announced that the Federal Court in the District of Delaware yesterday granted summary judgment on Kodak's behalf in a patent infringement patent infringement n. the manufacture and/or use of an invention or improvement for which someone else owns a patent issued by the government, without obtaining permission of the owner of the patent by contract, license or waiver. lawsuit brought by Ampex Corporation, ruling that Kodak's digital cameras do not infringe in·fringe v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es v.tr. 1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent. 2. a patent owned by Ampex. The decision ends the nearly two-year litigation An action brought in court to enforce a particular right. The act or process of bringing a lawsuit in and of itself; a judicial contest; any dispute. When a person begins a civil lawsuit, the person enters into a process called litigation. in the District Court, although Ampex may appeal the ruling to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. "We believe that the Court reached the correct result," said Laura G. Quatela, Managing Director, Intellectual Property Transactions and Vice President, Eastman Kodak Company. "Kodak is a long-standing innovator in the digital camera industry and we have devoted significant resources to the research and development of our digital capture technologies. We did not believe that Ampex's suit had merit, and the Court agreed with our position." The litigation began in October 2004 when Ampex filed concurrent actions before the International Trade Commission ("ITC ITC (Brit) n abbr (= Independent Television Commission) → Fernseh-Aufsichtsgremium ITC n abbr (BRIT) (= Independent Television Commission) → ") and in the District of Delaware, asserting patent infringement. After ten months of litigation in the ITC, and after the submission of initial trial testimony, Ampex dropped its ITC complaint. The focus of the litigation then turned to the Delaware suit. In May 2006, Kodak filed a motion asking the court for a ruling that it had not infringed Ampex's patent. The District Court granted the motion yesterday, finding that Kodak was entitled to a favorable fa·vor·a·ble adj. 1. Advantageous; helpful: favorable winds. 2. Encouraging; propitious: a favorable diagnosis. 3. judgment as a matter of law Judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) is a motion made by a party, during trial, claiming the opposing party has insufficient evidence to reasonably support its case. JMOL is similar to summary judgment, which is a motion made before trial. , and that none of the asserted claims of Ampex's patent were infringed. About Eastman Kodak Company Kodak is the world's foremost imaging innovator, providing leading products and services to the photographic, graphic communications and healthcare markets. With sales of $14.3 billion in 2005, the company is committed to a digitally oriented growth strategy focused on helping people better use meaningful images and information in their life and work. Consumers use Kodak's system of digital and traditional image capture products and services to take, print and share their pictures anytime, anywhere; Businesses effectively communicate with customers worldwide using Kodak solutions for prepress, conventional and digital printing and document imaging; Creative Professionals rely on Kodak technology to uniquely tell their story through moving or still images; and leading Healthcare organizations rely on Kodak's innovative products, services and customized workflow solutions to help improve patient care and maximize efficiency and information sharing See data conferencing. within and across their enterprise. More information about Kodak (NYSE: EK) is available at www.kodak.com. |
|
||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion