May 24, 2012

Patent Holder Takes a Shot at Nintendo over DSi Cameras

Nintendo of America, Inc. ("Nintendo") faces a new patent infringement lawsuit in the Western District of Washington, regarding the camera lenses included in its Nintendo DSi handheld gaming systems. The lawsuit, filed on May 24, 2011, accuses Nintendo of infringing United States Patent No. 6,888,686, owned by Plaintiffs Milestone Co., Ltd. and Satoshi Do.

Plaintiffs Do and Milestone Co. accuse Nintendo of both directly infringing the '686 patent by "making, using, selling, offering to sell, leasing, importing and/or exporting handheld gaming systems that infringe one or more claims of the '686 patent," and inducing Nintendo's customers to infringe the patent through Nintendo's "sales, advertising, and instructions." The plaintiffs claim that the camera lens system included in the Nintendo DSi "constitutes a material part of the inventions claimed in the '686 patent."

The technology covered by the '686 patent claims "a lens for image pickup" with multiple lenses of particular shapes, materials, refractive powers, and optical lengths. The plaintiffs claim that the camera included in the DSi handheld system incorporates this technology. 

As relief for the alleged acts of infringement, the plaintiffs are requesting to be paid a reasonable royalty for sales of the DSi devices, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest on damages resulting from the infringement. 

Nintendo's DS series is the highest selling handheld gaming platform of all time, having sold over 135 million units since the release of the original DS platform, according to Nintendo's recent financial reports. Approximately 25 million of those units sold were DSi or DSi XL systems. 

Nintendo comes to this case fresh off of a recent win in another patent dispute concerning its video game controller technology, where the U.S. Supreme Court declined late last year to reinstate a $21 million judgment against Nintendo that had been overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In that case, no infringement was found by any products that Nintendo is currently manufacturing. In the meantime however, Nintendo has been a repeated target of patent holders, settling one lawsuit concerning network encryption patents earlier this month, and currently facing a dispute before the International Trade Commission regarding patents related to a fantasy video game, which was filed in March. 

The case is Do et al. v. Nintendo of America Inc., Case No. 2:11-cv-00865, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Copyright © 2012, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP.

About the Author

Associate

Thayer Preece is an associate in the Intellectual Property group in the firm's Silicon Valley office.

650-815-2618

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.