Hillcrest Laboratories Inc. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al
United States District Court, District of Maryland
Case No. 8:08-cv-02188-RWT, Filed August 20, 2008

Case Update:

On September 24, 2009, the parties submitted a joint request to stay the case pending resolution of a concurrent case in the United States International Trade Commission. In late September, 2009, pursuant to a confidential settlement by the parties, the case before the ITC was terminated, and the District Court case was dismissed with prejudice shortly thereafter on October 16, 2009.

Original Post:

Nintendo faces another lawsuit over various aspects of its Nintendo Wii video game console. This time from Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc., a Maryland-based startup, that designs, develops and sells an interactive media system called HoME, which uses a combination of graphical, zooming and interface software for TV and motion control technology called Freespace.

In a strategic move, Hillcrest filed suit both in the U.S. District Court of Maryland, as well as with the International Trade Commission. The patents at issue are 7,139,983; 7,158,118; 7,262,760; and 7,414,611. According to Law360, the patents relate to the following technology:

“The company’s U.S. Patent Numbers 7,158,118; 7,262,760; and 7,414,611 cover a technology that is often used on television sets and allows users to access several forms of digital content, such as digital photographs, Internet Web sites and games, according to Hillcrest. The software typically uses a main menu that prompts users to choose which program they wish to use.
U.S. Patent Number 7,139,983, meanwhile, protects technology for a hand-held, three-dimensional pointing device that, unlike a two-dimensional device such as a computer mouse, allows the user to translate or rotate the pointing tool in space, instead of detecting movement relative to a flat surface.”The district court’s docket number is 8:08-cv-02188. We’ll add this case to our tracking list and keep you posted of new developments.

TTAB Affirms Disney's Rights in "Pooh" Trademarks
Case Update: ADC Technology v. Microsoft et al