Microsoft Sues Motorola For Patent Infringement… Over Android

Home > News & Articles > Microsoft Sues Motorola For Patent Infringement… Over Android

Microsoft Sues Motorola For Patent Infringement… Over Android

October 4th, 2010 androidoholic Leave a comment Go to comments

7. United States Patent No. 5,157,391, patrician “APPARATUS AND METHOD FORDISPLAYING A PLURALITY OF FUNCTION INDICATORS IN A SELECTIVE CALLRECEIVER” (“the ’391 patent”), was duly and legally released on October 20, 1992, to InventorRandi F. Weitzen. Plaintiff is the owners by choice of all right, pretension and fascination in and to the’391 patent, inclusive the correct to sue and redeem for past transgression thereof. A loyal andcorrect duplicate of the ’391 obvious is trustworthy hereto as Exhibit A.

8. United States Patent No. 5,359,317, patrician “METHOD AND APPARATUS FORSELECTIVELY STORING A PORTION OF A RECEIVED MESSAGE IN A SELECTIVECALL RECEIVER” (“the ’317 patent”), was duly and legally released on October 25, 1994, toInventors Fernando A. Gomez and Mark T. Stair. Plaintiff is the owners by choice of allright, pretension and fascination in and to the ’317 patent, inclusive the correct to sue and redeem for pastinfringement thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate of the ’317 obvious is trustworthy hereto as Exhibit B.

9. United States Patent No. 5,394,140, patrician “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PREPREPROGRAMMEDCALL-BACK-NUMBER-DETERMINED ALERT” (“the ’140 patent”), wasduly and legally released on February 28, 1995, to Inventors Poh-T’in Wong, Allen J. Weidler andWilliam J. Burke. Plaintiff is the owners by choice of all right, pretension and fascination in and to the’140 patent, inclusive the correct to sue for past transgression thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate ofthe ’140 obvious is trustworthy hereto as Exhibit C.

10. United States Patent No. 5,612,682, patrician “METHOD AND APPARATUS FORCONTROLLING UTILIZATION OF A PROCESS ADDED TO A PORTABLECOMMUNICATION DEVICE” (“the ’682 patent”), was duly and legally released Mar 18,1997, to Inventors Michael J. DeLuca, George W. Smoot and Douglas R. Kraul. Plaintiff is theowner by choice of all right, pretension and fascination in and to the ’682 patent, inclusive the correct tosue for past transgression thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate of the ’682 obvious is trustworthy hereto asExhibit D.

11. United States Patent No. 5,764,899, patrician “METHOD AND APPARATUS FORCOMMUNICATING AN OPTIMIZED REPLY” (“the ’899 patent”), was duly and legallyissued on June 9, 1998, to Inventors Gene Eggleston, Mitch Hansen and Anthony Rzany.Plaintiff is the owners by choice of all right, pretension and fascination in and to the ’899 patent,including the correct to sue and redeem for past transgression thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate ofthe ’899 obvious is trustworthy hereto as Exhibit E.

12. United States Patent No. 5,771,353, patrician “SYSTEM HAVING VIRTUAL SESSIONMANAGER USED SESSIONLESS-ORIENTED PROTOCOL TO COMMUNICATE WITHUSER DEVICE VIA WIRELESS CHANNEL AND SESSION-ORIENTED PROTOCOL TOCOMMUNICATE WITH HOST SERVER” (“the ’353 patent”), was duly and legally released on June 23, 1998, to Inventors Gene Eggleston and Mitch Hansen. Plaintiff is the owners byassignment of all right, pretension and fascination in and to the ’353 patent, inclusive the correct to sue andrecover for past transgression thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate of the ’353 obvious is attachedhereto as Exhibit F.

13. United States Patent No. 5,974,447, patrician “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR COUPLINGA SELECTIVE CALL RECEIVER TO WIDELY DISTRIBUTED INFORMATIONSOURCES” (“the ’447 patent”), was duly and legally released on October 26, 1999, to InventorsGregory L. Cannon, David P. Kilp and Nick P. Lagen. Plaintiff is the owners by choice ofall right, pretension and fascination in and to the ’447 patent, inclusive the correct to sue and redeem for pastinfringement thereof. A loyal and correct duplicate of the ’447 obvious is trustworthy hereto as Exhibit G.

( respond to this )( couple to this ) ( perspective in thread )