Keker & Van Nest has an inconvenient client.
After Immersion Corp. won an $82 million judgment against Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. for infringement of its patent on "haptic" (vibrating) joystick technology, a mysteriously named company—Internet Services, LLC—sued Immersion, hiring Keker & Van Nest attorneys Mark Lemley and Daralyn Durie in an attempt to cut itself a piece of patent victory pie.
Internet Services, LLC (ISLLC) appears to be a patent holding company. (at least, I can't tell what they make.) Although they must do something, because they did pay $1.7 million to Immersion in royalties, according to a declaration filed last week by company president Layne Britton.
Britton's company had an exclusive license with Immersion to market its vibrating technology for the adult gaming market. And Immersion wanted to outsource its patent lawsuits in the adult game market to ISLLC because "in some cases it might be bad publicity for Immersion to enforce its IP rights against some companies in ISLLC's exclusive field of use," according to Britton. That field of use had something to do with "teledildonics," a term I confess to being unfamiliar with until yesterday.
From Britton's declaration:
While negotiating ISLLC's license with Immersion, I met with Richard Abramson (then Immersion's head in-house lawyer) and Louis Rosenberg (Immersion's founder, Chairman and CEO and President) in Richard Ambramson's office at Immersion on multiple occasions. At one particular meeting, Messrs. Ambramson and Rosenberg discussed a concept called teledildonics. In explaining the concept of a teledildonic device, Mr. Abramson brought up the website www.teledildonics.com on his computer monitor and showed it to me and Mr. Rosenberg. Mr. Rosenberg then took apart a vibrating mouse that Immersion had developed for and sold in the retail market, pulled out its chip and motor, and explained to me that these two items cold (sic) be put into almost any form factor, including a teledildonic device. Messrs. Abramson and Rosenberg said that a teledildonic device would infringe Immersion's IP within ISLLC's exclusive field of use, and that ISLLC, not Immersion, could sue such infringing device makers. They further explained that because it might in some cases be bad publicity for Immersion to enforce its IP rights against some companies in ISLLC's exclusive field of use, Immersion wanted ISLLC to have enforcement rights within that field. And Messrs. Abramson and Rosenberg noted that it might only make sense for ISLLC to try to enforce its rights if the potential damages were high because ISLLC alone would have to bear the cost of such a suit.
Really, you can't make this stuff up. Now Lemley and company want off the case, but won't say why (who wouldn't want to enforce a patent on teledildonics? I don't get it.) But his client won't
let him off the hook. In fact, ISLLC hired new
attorneys just to argue against Lemley's motion to withdraw. Hey, when you've got the best, why settle for less, right? They're up against an Irell & Manella team led by Morgan Chu, after all.
(Interesting aside: Chu was assisted in the Immersion v. Sony lawsuit by Patent Troll Tracker blogger Rick Frenkel, who was then an associate at Irell & Manella.)
There is a suggestion in one brief that the reason for withdrawal may be related to a
conflict with ISLLC "advisor" Greg Piccionelli, a Los Angeles
lawyer. <Download PDF brief> Hard to know much more than that, since Judge Claudia Wilken has been all too obliging in allowing KVN lawyers to file
all the documents relating to their withdrawal motion under seal. (Immersion successfully moved the case from state to federal court.)
Yesterday, Lemley was in Judge Wilken's courtroom in Oakland, making his case to withdraw. There have been three mediations, Lemley said; his client walked out on the last negotiation. Now KVN would even "be willing to waive our
considerable fees until today to expedite the transfer."
Any takers?
Update: The patents are actually on "user interfaces," so they cover more than just joysticks. See U.S. Patent No. 5,889,672, entitled "Tactiley responsive user interface device and method therefor," and the even sexier U.S. Patent No. 6,275,213, "Tactile Feedback Man-Machine Interface Device."
Update #2: Keker & Van Nest's request to withdraw was denied without prejudice on May 2; ISLLC's claims were tossed out on summary judgment on May 16.
Update #3: In the original post I identified the president of ISLLC as Leslie Layne Britton. According to court documents, it's just Layne Britton.
