The U.S. patent interference No. 105,229 (Davis vs. Saito) was declared on August 24, 2004 and closed on March 1, 2005 against the Intel U.S. patent No. 5,805,706 (application No. 08/633,581) that was re-issued later as U.S. patent No. RE40,694 (application No. 11/016,685) called apparatus and method (e.g. HDCP, DTCP, CPRM...) for re-encrypting data without unsecured exposure of its non-encrypted format.
Since Intel failed to overcome the U.S. patent interference and to validate the re-issue application by February 8, 2005, Intel decided to buy Saito's invention from Mitsubishi via IV's shell company called Intarsia Software LLC (page No. 63 and No. 64), but Mitsubishi avoided signing the assignment of patent rights for some reason and the Intel signed it illegally on February 8, 2005 to put out Saito's invention.
The documents are available in the USPTO image file wrappers of the application No. 08/633,581 (total 6 pages of 10-04-2010 e.g. the copy of letter to Intel) and the re-issue application No. 11/016,685 (total 65 pages of 09-07-2011 e.g. the same legal authority called corporate auditor was shared by both of Intel and Mitsubishi during and after the U.S. patent interference).
The signature on the assignment of patent rights was illegally made on February 8, 2005 by the Intel (as shown in the Intel custodian list - ”page No. 51 and item No. 925") instead of the Mitsubishi (as shown in the U.S. SEC report - "page No. 24") before Notary in Tokyo, and then the U.S. patent interference was illegally settled on March 1, 2005 before Board of USPTO, meaning that Mitsubishi has illegally played as part of Intel since February 8, 2005.
Hence, Intel has no choice but to need signature of inventor-Saito to bring the long-standing patent frauds that are still continuing over a decade since 2005 to a stop and/or to validate the patent No. 5,805,706 and RE40,694. (The e-mail from Intel Legal Dept. Hillsboro in March 2015 is as below).
In other words, this legal matter can be solved between Intel and Saito because of the U.S. patent interference i.e. Intel (Davis) v. Saito, meaning that Mitsubishi can't stop the frauds forever.
Thank you for reading to the end.
© Copyright 2017 Far East Engineering Co., Ltd. All Rights Reserved