Court Rejects Collateral Attack On Patent Ownership

Posted on | March 11, 2009 | 3 Comments

2009-1167 Enovsys v. Nextel
CD/CA 06-cv-5306
Judge Ronald Lew

Defendant Nextel appeals from the order and judgment of Judge Ronald Lew affirming the jury's verdict of infringement and $2.78
million in damages.  Enovsys asserted 6,560,461 against Nextel's iDEN system, relating to a system to protect and manage the
disclosure of the precise location of a user's cell phone (e.g., the phone's
GPS position).

Most of the court's order is fairly typical for a post-trial motion–the court denying defendant's request for remittitur, new trial, and judgment as a matter of law.  The court found sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.

One interesting wrinkle is apparently a dispute over the ownership of the '461 patent, with Nextel claiming that plaintiff lacked standing to sue (i.e., was not the "owner") and also that Nextel was at least an equitable owner of the '461.

Without much explanation the court rejected these arguments as a collateral attack on a Judgment of Dissolution issued from the state family court.  Enovsys is an IP holding company controlled by Mundi Fomukong, one of the inventors.

More reading:

Counsel:

Enovsys: Dovel & Luner (Santa Monica)
Nextel: Finnegan Henderson (DC); DLA Piper (Los Angeles, San Diego, Austin)

Comments