Earlier today I published and blogged about Lodsys's motion for an extension of time to answer Apple's motion to intervene. Lodsys's motion, as entered yesterday, requested time until including August 27, 2011 -- two more months. But Lodsys has now withdrawn the previous motion and put in a new one, which I also published on Scribd and which asks for time until including July 27, 2011 -- one more month, not two.
The court docket contains the following explanation for this:
***FILED IN ERROR. PER ATTORNEY Document # 13, Motion for Extension of Time. PLEASE IGNORE.***
Document #13 was the original motion. The new one has document number 14.
This is now a more reasonable request, and I guess the court will grant it, especially since Apple doesn't oppose it.
Whether it was just an oversight on an attorney's part is another question. It could be true, in which case it doesn't reflect well on whoever did this, or it could be an excuse. But that's secondary.
There's also an update concerning the assertion against an Android game that I mentioned in my previous blog post. Cory Trese, the developer whose tweets I had quoted, received a call from Lodsys. They said they sent the document in error -- which would be good news -- but they also announced he'd get a new letter from them. So he figures he's still a target. Here are four new tweets from Cory:
#1: @AndroidPolice LodSys LLC just called and said that they sent me the package by mistake and that they would like it back. They said "sorry"
#2: @AndroidPolice I can hardly believe it myself. She gave assurances I would get another letter. No comment beyond "everyone makes mistakes"
[emphasis mine]#3: "As a follow up to our conversation, I wanted to re-confirm Lodsys' infringement notice was set to you and your business in error."
#4: @AndroidPolice Seems strange -- taking screenshots of my APK was not an accident. All this analysis was done with purpose. Still a target =(
Maybe Lodsys should send out fewer letters and start fewer lawsuits. That would certainly make it easier to get those motions and letters right, and would avoid the hassle of having to replace them. They have too much on their plate now. Just sayin'.
Unfortunately, Lodsys's announcement of a new letter shows that the problem hasn't gone away.
If you'd like to be updated on the smartphone patent disputes and other intellectual property matters I cover, please subscribe to my RSS feed (in the right-hand column) and/or follow me on Twitter @FOSSpatents.
Share with other professionals via LinkedIn:
