ITC Awards Microsoft an Import Ban on Motorola Phones, Tablets
Posted in: Mobile & Wireless at 20/05/2012 01:11
The U.S. International Trade Commission awarded Microsoft what could be a significant patent victory on Friday by deciding that all of Motorola Mobility's Android phones and tablets should face an American import ban.
The proposed ban, which was first reported by the website Foss Patents, is the result of a December ITC ruling that Motorola's Android devices violate a Microsoft-owned patent -- patent 6370566 -- that pertains to "generating meeting requests and group scheduling from a mobile device."
To read this Wired report in full, see:
Microsoft wins US import ban on Motorola's Android devices
The US International Trade Commission today ordered an import ban on Motorola Mobility Android products, agreeing with Microsoft that the devices infringe a Microsoft patent on "generating meeting requests" from a mobile device.
The import ban stems from a December ruling that the Motorola Atrix, Droid, and Xoom (among 18 total devices) infringed the patent, which Microsoft says is related to Exchange ActiveSync technology. Today, the ITC said in a "final determination of violation" that "the appropriate form of relief in this investigation is a limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry for consumption of mobile devices, associated software and components thereof covered by claims 1, 2, 5, or 6 of the United States Patent No. 6,370,566 and that are manufactured abroad by or on behalf of, or imported by or on behalf of, Motorola."
Microsoft Wins Ruling Forcing Change in Motorola Phones
Microsoft Corp. won a federal trade ruling that will force Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. to alter software on some of its Android-based mobile phones to keep bringing them into the U.S.
A U.S. International Trade Commission judge found that Motorola Mobility infringed a patent covering a program by Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft called ActiveSync, which lets users generate meeting requests among a group. Six other patents weren't violated, the judge ruled.