Lucent patent case goes to jury
biz.yahoo.com
Wednesday November 17, 8:35 pm Eastern Time
CORRECTED - Lucent patent case goes to jury
In WILMINGTON story headlined ``Lucent patent case vs Newbridge goes to jury,' please correct the 5th graf to
read: ``... Lucent, of Murray Hill, N.J., was established in 1995 when AT&T (NYSE:T - news) decided to divest
non-core business segments, including Bell Laboratories...' instead of ``... Lucent, of Murray Hill, N.J., is the
successor to Bell Laboratories, AT&T's (NYSE:T - news) research arm that was spun-off after the 1995
court-ordered breakup of AT&T.' (Clarifying the description of Lucent)
A corrected version follows.
By Rita Farrell
WILMINGTON, Del., Nov 17 (Reuters) - A federal jury began deliberations Wednesday following a three week trial on Lucent
Technologies Inc's (NYSE:LU - news) allegations that Newbridge Networks Corp's (NYSE:NN - news) MainStreet products infringe five
Lucent patents for data networking systems used in Internet communications.
In closing statements Wednesday in the U.S. District Court in Delaware, Lucent attorney John Desmarais asked the 10 member jury to award
Lucent damages of $10 million, or a one percent royalty for each patent. Desmarais also wants any damages tripled, claiming that
Newbridge's alleged infringement was ``willful' because the company continued to make new products after a July 1995 warning letter from
Lucent.
Newbridge attorney Thomas Kenworthy said Lucent's patents were invalid because they were anticipated by earlier work and because their
claims were too ``indefinite' to comply with patent law.
``Lucent said 'Hey, you're infringing;' but said nothing of what products were infringing what claims,' Kenworthy said. ``The pretense was
they wanted to give us a license (for $30 million). That's a joke. It was a holdup.'
``The inventors didn't even know what they were claiming. That breaks the faith with the bond that gives them a patent,' Kenworthy said,
referring to trial deposition testimony by the inventors who were awarded the patents in 1988 when they were AT&T (NYSE:T - news)
employees. Lucent, of Murray Hill, N.J., was established in 1995 when AT&T (NYSE:T - news) decided to divest non-core business
segments, including Bell Laboratories, court papers say.
Newbridge, of Toronto, Canada, denies that its MainStreet, MainStreetXpress, and VIVID products infringe Lucent's patent claims, even if
their validity is upheld. Further, Newbridge contends that many of its customers are licensed by Lucent to use equipment and methods
``falling within the scope of the patents,' court papers say.
The patents at issue are for equipment and processes used to manage congestion when electronic data, generated by computers, telephones,
television and facsimile machines, are transmitted on the same network system. Data networking allows two or more users to communicate
with one another, as with e- mail.
The patent suit is a sidebar to rumors that Newbridge is a possible takeover target for Swedish telecom equipment maker Ericsson and the
French communications giant Alcatel . Newbridge has denied the speculation that there are merger talks.
On Thursday, Newbridge is scheduled to hold its quarterly conference call with analysts and press to review second quarter 2000 fiscal
results. The call will follow an earlier meeting with staff and employees ``to discuss strategic directions,' spokesman Christopher Fox told
Reuters.
When asked what effect, if any, the outcome of the patent dispute would have on earnings, Fox said ``It's not appropriate for me to comment'
while litigation is pending.ÿ |
