Insights
Firm News

Dolby Wins Motion for Summary Judgment of Noninfringement in Patent Dispute with Lucent

April 25, 2005 Announcement

SAN FRANCISCO, CA (April 25, 2005) – Dolby Laboratories, Inc. (NYSE: DLB) announced today that on April 22, 2005 the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Dolby’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that Dolby has not infringed, induced others to infringe or contributed to the infringement of United States Patent No. 5,341,457 (the “’457 patent”) and United States Patent No. 5,627,938 (the “’938 patent”).  The ’457 patent and the ’938 patent generally involve a process and means for encoding and decoding audio signals.  Dolby had sought a declaration of noninfringement as part of an ongoing dispute with Lucent Technologies, Inc. and Lucent Technologies Guardian I, LLC (together “Lucent”)  In granting summary judgment, the court found that Lucent had not presented evidence from which a reasonable fact-finder could find that Dolby’s AC-3 technology, which is used in DVD’s, HDTV and other entertainment technologies and is licensed to hundred of companies around the world, infringes either the ‘457 or ’938 patents.

John Cooper, lead counsel for Dolby on the case and a partner at the law firm of Farella Braun + Martel, commented, “Lucent thought it could bully Dolby and its licensees into paying royalties even though there was no infringement — Friday’s ruling indicates just how wrong they were.”

In May 2001, after a number of its customers had been threatened with patent infringement claims by Lucent, Dolby filed a lawsuit against Lucent in the United States District Court seeking a declaration that the ’457 and ’938 patents are invalid and that Dolby has not infringed, induced others to infringe or contributed to the infringement of any of the claims of these patents (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. C01-20709 JF(RS)). In August 2002, Lucent filed counterclaims alleging that Dolby has infringed the two patents directly and by inducing or contributing to the infringement of those patents by others. Lucent contended that products incorporating Dolby’s AC-3 technology infringe those patents. The court’s April 22, 2005 ruling resolves these issues in favor of Dolby.    As part of the court’s action, the trial date with respect to Dolby’s lawsuit seeking to invalidate the ’457 and ’938 patents was rescheduled to September 2005. 

About Farella Braun + Martel LLP
Since its founding in 1962, Farella Braun + Martel has achieved a national reputation for the acumen of its business practice, the high profile cases of its complex commercial litigation practice and its prestigious client base. The San Francisco-based firm serves a diverse group of clients from multinational corporations to emerging businesses. The firm also has an office in the Napa Valley focused on the wine industry and related businesses. 

Firm Highlights

Publication

Three Steps Licensees Can Take to Protect Their IP Rights in Bankruptcy

During periods of widespread economic disruption such as the present, operating businesses must be able to identify and respond to threats to the financial health of their contracting counterparts in order to protect key...

Read More
Publication

Strategy Lessons From Wells Fargo Fintech Patent Litigation

United States Automobile Association (USAA) is a financial services company that provides insurance, banking, investment, and retirement products and services for members of the military and their families. On June 7, 2018, USAA filed...

Read More
News

52 Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2021

Read More
Publication

COVID-19 IP Lessons: Consider the Big Picture

In any crisis, there are always those that look to take advantage of the situation.  The coronavirus pandemic is no different. Here, we have highlighted a few of the most egregious fortune hunters, attempting...

Read More
News

Winston Liaw Selected as 2020 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinder

Read More
Publication

How Antitrust and Unfair Competition Laws Affect Platform Providers’ Relationships With ISVs, API Developers, and Scrapers

A wide variety of business and consumer platforms host mutually beneficial ecosystems. But these ecosystems are also fraught with antitrust risk that arises when platforms try to terminate or modify the terms of third-party...

Read More
News

Eight Farella Braun + Martel Lawyers Listed in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2021

SAN FRANCISCO/ST. HELENA, CA, August 20, 2020: Eight Farella Braun + Martel lawyers were listed in the inaugural Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch . This recognition is awarded to attorneys who are earlier in...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys Named 2020 IP Stars by Managing Intellectual Property - Firm Recommended for Patent Litigation

Farella Braun + Martel’s James L. Day , Jeffrey M. Fisher , Eugene Mar , Stephanie P. Skaff and Roderick M. Thompson have been named IP Stars by Managing Intellectual Property in its 2020...

Read More
Publication

Breaking up the Patent Monopoly for the Benefit of Batteries

The patent monopoly is at odds with the global need for battery storage technology. As the world mobilizes towards climate change solutions, companies with battery patents will face increasing pressure to share this critical...

Read More
Publication

How Defense Strategies Can Go Awry When Pursuing Concurrent PTAB Relief in Financial Services Patent Litigation

United States Automobile Association (USAA), a financial services company that provides insurance, banking, investment, and retirement products and services for members of the military and their families, filed a surprising patent infringement complaint against Wells Fargo...

Read More