“The lawsuit we intend to dismiss is a patent infringement claim that we originally filed in May of 2010,” says QuadTech president Karl Fritchen. “Two developments have driven us to make a business decision that the case against QIPC’s IDS system is no longer financially worth pursuing.
“First, our patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,412,577) for positioning the camera over a region of interest expired 18 months after we filed the suit.
“Second, QIPC has only recently begun to provide substantial responsive information in the case, and we have concluded that there has been only a single infringing sale in the U.S.—and none since the filing of the lawsuit, meaning that there are relatively minimal damages. With the patent now expired, and given the high cost of patent litigation and the complexities of this case, it is not financially reasonable for QuadTech to continue to pursue this litigation.“
In the false advertising lawsuit, QIPC concedes that it has never sold a single markless register control system anywhere in the world. The court recently ordered QIPC to produce evidence that the commercial markless register control system portrayed in its advertising ever existed in the first place. Accordingly, QuadTech is continuing to pursue its false advertising case against QIPC.