Wednesday, May 26, 2010

At least Lost finally ended!

Much like the TV series Lost, the Cognex-MVTec battle goes on and on. And while I wonder why I keep following the unfolding events, I shall continue to bring you the news.

The news as of today is this: there is no news.

MVTec have in recent weeks filed two motions for summary determination, one claiming that the Cognex patents 7,016,539 and 1,065,262 are invalid because they don’t cover patentable material and the other claiming that Halcon doesn’t infringe either patent anyway.

In both cases Administrative Law Judge Carl C Charneski ruled in favor of Cognex, saying as best I understand it, that the argument is complicated and needs a thorough examination. What makes things even more complex is that the MVTec claim of unpatentable material relates to these complex business process software issues (think Amazon’s One Click ordering system,) where a Supreme Court ruling is expected any day. (Google “Bilski” +”Supreme Court” for more details.)

If you’re interested in following along, here are a couple of links, courtesy of

ALJ Charneski Rules On Motion For Summary Determination Of Invalidity In Certain Machine Vision Software (337-TA-680)

ALJ Charneski Rules On Motion for Summary Determination Of Non-Infringement In Certain Machine Vision Software (337-TA-680)

No comments: