Blackberry 2008 Annual Report Download - page 78

76
RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED
notes to the consolidated financial statements continued
In thousands of United States dollars, except share and per share data, and except as otherwise indicated
States Patent Nos. 5,359,317; 5,074,684; 5,764,899; 5,771,353;
5,958,006; 5,706,211 and 6,101,531. On February 21, 2008,
RIM filed a second complaint in the Dallas District Court
seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and
invalidity of Motorola US Patent No. 5,157,391; 5,394,140;
5,612,682 and 5,974,447. On February 16, 2008, Motorola
filed a complaint against the Company in the Eastern District
of Texas, Marshall Division alleging infringement of United
States Patent Nos. 5,157,391; 5,359,317; 5,394,140; 5,612,682;
5,764,899; 5,771,353 and 5,974,447. On February 20, 2008,
Motorola filed an amended complaint adding United States
Patent Nos. 5,074,684; 5,706,211; 5,958,006 and 6,101,531 to
the complaint. On February 16, 2008, Motorola filed another
complaint in the District of Delaware against the Company
seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and
invalidity related to United States Patent No. 5,664,055 and
5,699,485 assigned to RIM as well as United States Patent No.
6,611,254, 6,661,255 and 6,919,879. On February 20, 2008, the
complaint was amended to include RIM’s United States Patent
No. 6,278,442; 6,452,588; 6,489,950 and 7,227,536. Proceedings
are pending. At this time, the likelihood of damages or
recoveries and the ultimate amounts, if any, with respect to
this litigation is not determinable. Accordingly, no amount has
been recorded in these consolidated financial statements as at
March 1, 2008
On January 24, 2007, RIM was served with a Notice of
Application that was filed with the Ontario Superior Court of
Justice - Commercial List by a pension fund that alleges it was
a shareholder, seeking various orders against the Company
and named directors. On April 27, 2007 RIM was served with
a Fresh As Amended Notice of Application (the “Amended
Notice of Application”) by the shareholder. The Amended
Notice of Application sought an order for a declaration that
various actions of the Company and the named directors were
oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to, or unfairly disregards the
interests of the pension fund. Among other things, the pension
fund also sought an order granting it leave to commence a
derivative action in the name and on behalf of the Company
relating to RIM’s option granting practices, seeking damages
and ancillary relief against certain of RIM’s directors. On
October 5, 2007, RIM and the other defendants entered into
an agreement with the shareholder to settle the application
and proposed derivative action. Under the settlement, each of
the respondents to the application and each of the defendants
in the proposed derivative action denied the allegations
made against them by the pension fund. The settlement did
not result in the payment of any monetary compensation to
the pension fund (apart from legal costs) or past or present
RIM answered the first Complaint on January 28, 2008 and
the second Complaint on March 14, 2008. At this time, the
likelihood of damages or recoveries and the ultimate amounts,
if any, with respect to this litigation is not determinable.
Accordingly, no amount has been recorded in these
consolidated financial statements as at March 1, 2008.
On October 18, 2007, Saxon Innovations, LLC, filed a
complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas, Tyler Division, against RIM and thirteen other
defendants alleging infringement of United States Patents
Nos. 5,592,555, 5,771,394, 5,502,689, and 5,247,621 and seeking
an injunction and monetary damages. RIM’s answer to the
complaint was originally due January 7, 2008; however, RIM
received an extension of time to file answer, and the answer
was filed on March 5, 2008. Proceedings are currently pending.
At this time, the likelihood of damages or recoveries and the
ultimate amounts, if any, with respect to this litigation is not
determinable. Accordingly, no amount has been recorded in
these consolidated financial statements as at March 1, 2008.
On November 9, 2007, AutoText Technologies, Inc.
(“AutoText”) filed a complaint in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division,
against the Company and twenty-three other defendants
alleging infringement of United States Patent No. 5,305,205
seeking an injunction and undisclosed monetary damages.
AutoText did not serve its complaint on RIM in this litigation.
On January 9, 2008, AutoText voluntarily dismissed its own case
against RIM.
On December 20, 2007, TeleCommunication Systems,
Inc. (“TCS”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia, against the Company alleging
infringement of United States Patent No. 6,871,215 and seeking
monetary damages and an injunction. On March 12, 2008,
in response to a joint motion filed by both parties, the Court
granted a 30 day extension to RIM’s Answer date so that the
parties can pursue settlement negotiations. On April 11, 2008,
TCS voluntarily dismissed its lawsuit against RIM in the Eastern
District of Virginia pursuant to a standstill agreement that the
parties signed earlier the same day. The standstill agreement
is effective for a two month period ending June 12, 2008.
On February 16, 2008, the Company filed a complaint in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas (Dallas Division) (the “Dallas District Court”) against
Motorola alleging breach of contract, antitrust violations,
patent infringement of United States Patent No. 5,664,055;
5,699,485; 6,278,442; 6,452,588; 6,489,950; 6,611,254, 6,661,255;
6,919,879 and 7,227,536 and seeking a declaratory judgment
of non-infringement and invalidity against Motorola United