Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 123

Thread: Trijicon Suing Holosun; Patent Infringement

  1. #21
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania
    Quote Originally Posted by Caballoflaco View Post
    @vcdgrips or anybody with law or patent law experience. Would Trijicon requesting a jury trial reveal anything about how their law firm views the merits of the case.

    Ie if it’s a strong technical case for patent infringement get it in front of a judge who is used to dealing with and understands complex patent laws vs put it front of a jury and pull out the ‘ol Chinese made scopes company stole good American technology and is costing jobs for good Americans.
    I am a patent attorney, but have not had the chance to look at the patent yet.

    Demanding a jury trial must be done early or it is waived. The demand can always be dropped.

    I doubt they would file a suit they thought had little merit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by BillSWPA View Post
    I am a patent attorney, but have not had the chance to look at the patent yet.

    Demanding a jury trial must be done early or it is waived. The demand can always be dropped.

    I doubt they would file a suit they thought had little merit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Looking forward to your analysis!
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  3. #23
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Caballoflaco View Post
    @vcdgrips or anybody with law or patent law experience. Would Trijicon requesting a jury trial reveal anything about how their law firm views the merits of the case.

    Ie if it’s a strong technical case for patent infringement get it in front of a judge who is used to dealing with and understands complex patent laws vs put it front of a jury and pull out the ‘ol Chinese made scopes company stole good American technology and is costing jobs for good Americans.
    Strong claim or not, if you think a jury trial could benefit your patriotic American client v. evil communist thieves, then why wouldn't you make a jury demand? I'm not making any statements about the strength of claims, but I wouldn't try read too much into a jury demand. I've always thought patent law is basically witchcraft anyways. We do a fair bit of IP work, but it's all trademark. When someone uses "the Armed Citizen" to refer to a collection of cases of good guys shooting bad guys or a very particular looking eagle clutching a rifle I'm good to go, but I've always thought patent attorneys and examiners would be well served by reading this book.

  4. #24
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Away, away, away, down.......
    Thanks guys appreciate the info.
    im strong, i can run faster than train

  5. #25

  6. #26
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania
    I am now looking at the complaint on PACER.

    Initially, a few basic principles.

    Obtaining a patent requires describing the invention with sufficient detail so that one skilled in the art can make and use it. It requires convincing a patent examiner (who always has an engineering or science degree and usually has a law degree as well) that the claims are novel (no one else has done it before) and nonobvious (not obvious to one skilled in the art and familiar with all available prior art). That last requirement is the focus of most of m time arguing with examiners.

    Expressed differently, if a prior art device can be shown that has all claimed features, the claims are not novel. If various prior art devices have subsets of the features within the claims, and one skilled in the art would find it obvious to combine them, then the claims are obvious.

    Infringing a patent requires that each and every element described within at least one claim be present in the accused device. If even one element is missing, there is no infringement.

    The complaint includes a claim chart (exhibit 4), breaking each claim apart into its individual clauses, and showing exactly how the Holosun product is alleged to infringe. Most courts now have enhanced pleading requirements for patent cases, requiring exactly this type of claim chart. At least on its face, and without doing a full infringement study, the claim chart appears to make a good case for infringement. This is absolutely not a frivolous suit filed in the hope that the defendant runs out of money before the court figures out that it is frivolous.

    Trijicon expends significant resources bringing its products to market. If another company can simply reverse engineer those products and then undercut Trijicon's price, then what benefit would there be to developing better red dot sights?

    Responding to some other posts, sending multiple cease and desist letters does not indicate lack of intent to enforce the patent. Rather, it shows that Holosun continued to infringe even after having actual notice of the accusation of infringement. Unless Holosun can show that it had reason to believe that its products did not infringe or that the allegedly infringed claims are invalid, it may be liable for enhanced damages and/or Trijicon's attorney fees.

    Designing around a patent is not stealing intellectual property. Instead, it is trying to figure out how not to steal intellectual property. Part of my job in preparing and prosecuting patent applications it so make designing around a patent as difficult as possible without giving up some advantage that my client's patented product provides.

  7. #27
    Rational parties prefer to settle disputes, rather than allow a third party, whether judge or jury, reach a decision. Litigation is not an end in itself, it is just another means of getting settlement leverage.

    I read zero into requesting a jury trial. It could mean that Trijicon feels their case is “patriotic.” It could mean they want to bleed Holosun by making the case more expensive. It could mean they have a weak case and feel a jury might be a better bet than a judge. In years past, lots of weak cases filed in south Texas with requests for a jury trial got settled for a lot of money.

    Talking to my retail source, Holosun is way outselling Trijicon on pistol optics. Trijicon might have had the good fortune to realize Holosun’s redesign arguably violated their patent, and this action to enforce their patent has the main benefit of hurting Holosun, by distracting management and costing them money. Trijicon invested substantial sums in their intellectual property and gets to enjoy the protection of that investment.

    PS: Google news just pushed an alert to my wife’s computer “US Weapons maker seeks ban on Chinese competitor’s sights.”
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  8. #28
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Rational parties prefer to settle disputes, rather than allow a third party, whether judge or jury, reach a decision. Litigation is not an end in itself, it is just another means of getting settlement leverage.

    I read zero into requesting a jury trial. It could mean that Trijicon feels their case is “patriotic.” It could mean they want to bleed Holosun by making the case more expensive. It could mean they have a weak case and feel a jury might be a better bet than a judge. In years past, lots of weak cases filed in south Texas with requests for a jury trial got settled for a lot of money.

    Talking to my retail source, Holosun is way outselling Trijicon on pistol optics. Trijicon might have had the good fortune to realize Holosun’s redesign arguably violated their patent, and this action to enforce their patent has the main benefit of hurting Holosun, by distracting management and costing them money. Trijicon invested substantial sums in their intellectual property and gets to enjoy the protection of that investment.

    PS: Google news just pushed an alert to my wife’s computer “US Weapons maker seeks ban on Chinese competitor’s sights.”
    Litigation is often a very expensive way to get approximately where you should have arrived through negotiation. Unfortunately not everyone is reasonable, and sometimes they need to be hit over the head with the hammer of litigation to either reach a negotiated solution or obtain a judgment.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by BillSWPA View Post
    Litigation is often a very expensive way to get approximately where you should have arrived through negotiation. Unfortunately not everyone is reasonable, and sometimes they need to be hit over the head with the hammer of litigation to either reach a negotiated solution or obtain a judgment.
    What is interesting is the new Holosun optics have been delayed for some months, and we believed it was due to Covid. I guess it is possible the delay had something to do with this lawsuit. As you point out, litigation often follows a breakdown in negotiations. Presumably Trijicon didn’t drop this lawsuit on them by surprise and it is possible it came after being unable to reach a negotiated settlement.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  10. #30
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    What is interesting is the new Holosun optics have been delayed for some months, and we believed it was due to Covid. I guess it is possible the delay had something to do with this lawsuit. As you point out, litigation often follows a breakdown in negotiations. Presumably Trijicon didn’t drop this lawsuit on them by surprise and it is possible it came after being unable to reach a negotiated settlement.
    Good point.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •