Metamorfyx, LLC v. Vanek, Vickers & Masini CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 11, 2015B252798California4,961 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

1. Plaintiffs’ Case In accordance with the standard of review, our summary of the evidence indulges every legitimate inference which may be drawn from the evidence in favor of plaintiffs. Plaintiffs Hernan Camacho and Robert Granadino formed plaintiff Metamorfyx to obtain patents for their designs of ergonomic keyboards. After they obtained their first two patents, they began to notice there were potentially infringing keyboards in the market. Eventually, Metamorfyx retained defendants Eugene Cummings, Joseph Vanek, and Brian Cardoza, to license and prosecute Metamorfyx’s patents. The biggest infringer was Microsoft but there were many other infringers. In the course of litigation, nearly every major manufacturer of ergonomic keyboards agreed to license Metamorfyx’s patents. Defendants negotiated with Microsoft. During negotiations, Microsoft filed a request with the United States Patent and Trademark office to reexamine six claims of a Metamorfyx patent. The patent survived the reexamination. During the reexamination process, Microsoft made an offer to pay a royalty per keyboard for certain keyboard types and a “modest” paid-up license for other keyboard types…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.