14 , 2004
NORCO, California -- The federal district court in Madison,
Wisconsin recently ruled in a suit brought by AVID Identification Systems,
Inc., that certain products used and distributed by Pethealth Services
(USA) Inc. infringe a patent owned by AVID. AVID and Pethealth settled
the remaining portions of the case.
Judge John C. Shabaz Order ruled: “IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s
motion for summary judgment of infringement is GRANTED…”,
and “IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary
judgment of non-infringement is DENIED.”
“We anticipate that this ruling will help validate the 125 kHz based
microchip technology widely and commonly used in the U.S. for pet identification.”
said AVID founder Hannis L. Stoddard III, D.V.M., “AVID believes
that the U.S. pet microchipping and recovery systems were jeopardized
recently by several reckless attempts to introduce an incompatible 134.2
kHz based microchip technology.”
AVID, a pioneer in radio frequency identification (“RFID”)
technology since 1985, is seeking to prevent Pethealth from making, using,
selling, or inducing the wrongful use of infringing products. AVID has
eighteen U.S. patents and corresponding foreign patents that cover its
advances in RFID scanner and microchip transponder technology.
The AVID RFID system uses a scanner to read the identification code in
a microchip transponder. Microchips are used to identify and trace animals
and inanimate objects around the world. RFID is the emerging technology
for many enhanced applications including; security access control, supply
chain management, car immobilizers, automotive speed passes, counterfeit
protection, asset management and inventory control.
Chadd Taylor of Kirkland & Ellis and lead litigation counsel for AVID
in this case said, “This is a strong step towards validating the
hard work that AVID has put into developing this technology. AVID will
continue to aggressively protect its valuable intellectual property.”
The Wisconsin ruling is not the first to vindicate AVID’s intellectual
property rights. On June 4, 2004, United States Court of Appeal for the
Federal Circuit ruled in favor of AVID, against infringers Global ID Systems,
Inc. and Douglas Hull. The defendants had been found liable for unfair
competition, trademark infringement and patent infringement. The infringement
was ruled to be willful and unexcused, which doubled the damages awarded
to AVID. David B. Abel of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey was the successful
lead litigator in the Global ID case.
In a separate patent infringement case, in May of this year, AVID filed
suit in East Texas against Philips Electronics North America Corp., Medical
Management International, Inc. dba Banfield the Pet Hospital, Datamars,
Inc. and others, related to AVID’s scanning and microchipping technology.
AVID is represented by Fish & Richardson P.C. in this matter.
Advising AVID is Professor Mark A. Lemley, William H. Neukom Professor
of Law, Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology,
of counsel Keker & Van Nest LLP.
For further information, please contact:
Dr. Dan Knox , Director Companion Animal Field Operations, 314.487.5842,
Loran Hickton, Salmon Creek Public Relations Inc., 360.571.5560, email@example.com
For more info about AVID, visit www.avidid.com
For more info about Fish & Richardson, visit www.fr.com
For more information about Kirkland & Ellis, visit www.kirkland.com
For more information about Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, visit www.ssd.com
For more information about Keker & Van Nest, visit www.kvn.com
and questions please contact: Info@EIDLtd.com