Enough people have asked for more information regarding the Holoverse/Dennis Solomon matter that I thought it appropriate to clear up some confusion before the speculation got out of hand. Right up front, I'll say Microvision strongly believes that there is no merit to any of Mr. Solomon's allegations against Microvision and is highly confident that Mr. Solomon has no valid claims against Microvision.
Now, a little background, then some details of the "litigation." Microvision is not the first target of Mr. Solomon. Microvision is not even the only current Solomon target. Mr. Solomon apparently is currently suing TI/Raytheon in one court and Teledyne in another (Teledyne is also a defendant in this case). In each case Mr. Solomon apparently acts pro se (as his own lawyer).
As far as I know, no one from Microvision has ever met or even seen Mr. Solomon in person. I believe the first time any one at Microvision ever heard of Mr. Solomon was when he contacted Microvision in the fall of 1997 in an apparent attempt to license some alleged technology to Microvision. Very quickly, Microvision determined that it had no interest in being involved with Mr. Solomon or his alleged technology and attempted to terminate the discussions.
Undaunted, Mr. Solomon recently filed a complaint against Microvision and ten other defendants. Among the defendants, Mr. Solomon names The University of Washington and two UW inventors as well as a number of unrelated parties including MIT, Teledyne Display Technologies, Altman Stage Lighting Company, an MIT lawyer, and three individuals who appear to have no association whatsoever with any of the other defendants.
Mr. Solomon alleges that, for the past thirteen years (Microvision is less than five years old), the defendants engaged in a series of conspiracies against Mr. Solomon. Based upon the alleged conspiracies, Mr. Solomon filed suit for (a) Sherman antitrust violations, (b) RICO (racketeering), and (c) Massachusetts tort law (even though the filing is in the Western District of Washington).
THERE ARE NO PATENT OR PATENT INFRINGEMENT CLAIMS!!!
I'll repeat my opening point - Microvision believes there is no merit to any of Mr. Solomon's allegations against Microvision and is highly confident that Mr. Solomon has no valid claims against Microvision. Microvision has begun the process of addressing Mr. Solomon's filings and intends to seek appropriate legal recourse.
This is the cost of success. It seems that every visible corporation must endure at least one suit of this kind.
|
