Blackberry 2009 Annual Report Download - page 77

75
of non-infringement was also included. A first hearing on the
merits has been scheduled for May 28, 2009. Proceedings are
currently pending.
On September 17, 2008, Visto filed a lawsuit in Dusseldorf,
Germany alleging infringement by RIM of Visto divisional
patents EP 1,722,321; 1,783,675; and 1,783,927. A case
management conference was held on December 9, 2008 and
trial was set in Germany for December 10, 2009. Proceedings
are currently pending. At this time, the likelihood of damages
or recoveries and the ultimate amounts, if any, with respect
to the litigation (or any related litigation) is not determinable.
Accordingly, no amount has been recorded in these
consolidated financial statements as at February 28, 2009.
On May 31, 2006, the Company filed a declaratory
judgment action in the Dallas District Court against DataQuill
BVI, Ltd. in which RIM seeks a ruling that the U.S. Patent
6,058,304 is invalid and not infringed by RIM products. On
August 15, 2006, DataQuill filed a motion to dismiss to which
RIM filed a response on September 15, 2006. On March 27,
2007, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Texas issued an order denying DataQuill’s Motion to Dismiss.
On April 13, 2007, RIM filed an amended complaint which
added a declaratory judgment counterclaim to the suit
seeking a ruling that DataQuill’s continuation patent of the
6,058,304 patent, U.S. Patent 7,139,591 is invalid and not
infringed by RIM products. On April 24, 2007, DataQuill
filed its answer to RIM’s declaratory judgment complaint.
DataQuill counterclaimed for infringement of the 6,058,304
and 7,139,591 patents and is seeking an injunction and
monetary damages. On May 9, 2008, the Northern District
of Texas granted the parties’ joint motion to amend the
scheduling order and reset the trial date for April 20, 2009.
Subsequently, the parties agreed to submit the dispute to
binding alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings.
Based on this agreement, the parties jointly moved to stay the
case until January 15, 2009 and to vacate all case deadlines,
including the April 20, 2009 trial date. The court granted
the parties’ joint motion and further ordered that, if ADR is
unsuccessful, then entry of a revised docket control order will
be necessary. On November 24, 2008, the parties completed
settlement of the lawsuit for an amount that is not material to
these consolidated financial statements.
On June 6, 2007, Minerva Industries (“Minerva”) filed a
complaint in the Marshall District Court against the Company
alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,681,120 and seeking
invalid and declare that RIM’s activities in Belgium, France,
Italy, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain do not infringe
patent EP0996905. On May 28, 2007, Visto filed a request
with the Court of Milan that the Court hold a hearing on
the issue of whether the Court has jurisdiction to decide
that RIM’s activities in Belgium, France, Italy, Germany, the
Netherlands and Spain do not infringe patent EP0996905.
On April 18, 2008, the Court of Milan, special division for
industrial and intellectual property filed a partial decision
(no. 5111/2008) declaring its own lack of jurisdiction over the
claims for the assessment of non-infringement of European
patent EP0996905 in its national portions, other than the
Italian portion. On July 11, 2008, RIM filed an appeal of
the decision on jurisdiction. On May 27, 2008, the Court
scheduled an oral hearing for December 16, 2008. On
November 12, 2008, Visto sent a letter to the European
Patent Office submitting to revocation throughout Europe
of its patent EP0996905. Visto has sent notice to the Court
of Milan and requested termination of proceedings. RIM
requested expansion of the subject matter to be considered
by the Court appointed expert to include recently issued
Visto divisional patents (EP 1,722,321; 1,783,675; 1,783,927). A
hearing on this question was held on December 9, 2008, and
the issue was deferred to a three judge panel. Also, a hearing
was held regarding RIM’s appeal of the decision of the Court
of Milan regarding non-Italian portions of the Visto patents-
in-suit. Proceedings are currently pending.
On October 16, 2008, RIM filed a nullity action in the UK
asserting invalidity of Visto divisional patents EP 1,722,321;
1,783,675; and 1,783,927. On November 21, 2008, Visto
counter-claimed in UK asserting nullity of four RIM patents
and infringement of Visto’s divisional patents. A case
management conference was held on December 5, 2008 at
which trial was scheduled in the UK for September 14, 2009.
On September 18, 2008, Visto filed a lawsuit in Turin,
Italy alleging that RIM infringes Visto divisional patents
EP 1,722,321; 1,783,675; and 1,783,927. Visto requested a
preliminary injunction against RIM. On January 7, 2009 the
Turin Court rejected Visto’s petition and ordered Visto to pay
costs. On January 28, 2009, Visto informed RIM of its decision
not to appeal the Turin Court’s decision.
On October 18, 2008, RIM filed a lawsuit in Rome, Italy
alleging invalidity of Visto divisional patents EP 1,722,321;
1,783,675; and 1,783,927. An allegation by certain RIM officers