Menu
IET Expert Witness
IET’s president, Dr. Terry E. Riemer, PhD EE and his colleague Jim Tedesco, MS EE, have worked together to assist attorneys seeking their depth of expertise in legal cases involving patent disputes particularly in patent infringement cases.
In six major cases, IET served as testifying expert in areas of wireless communications, telecommunications networking, MP3 standards and audio compression, location-signal GPS technology, and biomedical technology such as pulse oximetry. In the process, IET gained experience on both sides of litigation cases, providing expert opinion to attorneys representing plaintiffs as well as defendants. The opportunity to work for both plaintiffs and defendants gives Dr. Riemer the credibility of being objective that many other experts lack.
“Attorneys hire IET because of Dr. Riemer’s extensive expertise in a broad range of areas,” Mr. Tedesco said. “They want him not only for his theoretical, academic background but also for his practical, real- world experience in the industry.”
Analyzing research data involving hardware, firmware, software, patents, patent history, depositions, and related patent documents, IET’s engineers generate expert reports to expound on the facts of each case to assist attorneys in serving their clients to achieve optimal results.
“We’re hired to offer our expert opinion, but through research and analysis we basically reverse engineer the technology, analyzing the hardware and software to piece together how the technology functions and map that against the language in the related patent,” Mr. Tedesco said.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 1:12-CV-20232
Settled
WI-LAN USA, INC. and WI-LAN INC.,
Plantiffs,
v.
RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION,
Defendants
In this complaint, Wi-LAN alleged that Blackberry, formerly known as Research in Motion, Ltd. infringed on existing patents with its Bluetooth-compliant products such as Blackberry Playbook, Bold, Touch, Curve, Style, Pearl, and Storm.
IET’s provided expert consulting services in telecommunications networking to review records, conduct research and analysis for the case, which settled before trial.
IET represented the Plaintiff and worked for Desmarais, LLP.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
Civil Action No. 2:10-CV-112-JRG
Decided
MOBILEMEDIA IDEAS LLC.,
Plantiff,
v.
HTC CORPORATION AND HTC AMERICA, INC,
Defendants, Jury Trial Demanded
In this complaint MobileMedia Ideas alleged that HTC infringed on its patents with smartphone products which employ Mobile Media Ideas patented technology. By providing customers with instructions about the use of its products, HTC allegedly encouraged this infringement.
IET was hired to provide expert services in the area of MP3 standards and audio compression technology to review records and conduct research and analysis for the case. In support of the case, IET assisted with the following:
IET represented the Defendants and as consultant for Howrey LLP and Mayer-Brown.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Civil Action No. 09-080-LPS-MPT
Decided – Masimo Won The Case
MASIMO CORPORATION,
Plantiff,
v.
PHILLIPS ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION and PHILIPS MEDIZIN SYSTEME BÖBLINGEN GMBH,
Defendants, Jury Trial Demanded
In this complaint, the Plaintiff, Masimo Corporation, alleged that the defendants’ production, use, and sale of its biomedical pulse oximeter devices and patient monitors infringed on fourteen of the Plaintiff’s patents.
IET provided consulting services in the area of digital signal processing to review records, conducted research and analysis for the case, and provided a written expert report.
In support of the case, IET assisted with the following:
IET represented the Plaintiff and worked for Williams-Kherkher.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION
Civil Action No. 9:07-CV-114
Settled
LUNAREYE, INC.,
Plantiff,
v.
WEBTECH WIRELESS, INC.,
Defendants, Jury Demanded
In this complaint, the Plaintiff, LunarEye, alleged that WebTech Wireless product was infringing on its patent. The patent was reexamined by the USPTO and the validity of claims was questioned. The reexamination concluded in LunarEye’s favor and it added 21 additional claims. The main claim of the patent relates to a triggerable location-reporting apparatus.
IET was hired to perform expert consulting services including the review of documents and devices, analysis work and travel time associated with the following tasks:
IET represented the Plaintiff and worked for Williams Kherkher Hart Boundas, LLP
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION
Case No. 9:07-CV-113
Settled
LUNAREYE, INC.,
Plantiff,
v.
AIRIQ INC., AIRIQ US HOLDINGS, INC., AIRIQ US, INC., AIRIQ MARINE, INC., AIRIQ LLC, and CALAMP CORP.,
Defendants, Jury Demanded
In this complaint, the Plaintiff, LunarEye, alleged that the Defendants, AirIQ and CalAmp, were infringing, contributing to infringement, and inducing others to infringe on four patents by their products, including a wireless cellular transceiver, GPS receiver, computer processor, and various software and firmware that allows users to access real-time information about the vehicle.
IET was retained to perform expert consulting services including the review of documents and devices, analysis work and associated travel. The case was settled before trial.
IET represented the Plaintiff and worked for Susman Godfrey LLP
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION
Case No. 9:05-CV-188
Settled
LUNAREYE, INC.,
v.
INDEPENDENT WITNESS, INC., BP AMERICA PRODUCTION COMPANY and BP AMERICA.,
Jury Demanded
In this case, the Plaintiff, LunarEye, filed suit against the Defendant, IWI, claiming patent infringement. The court conducted a Markman hearing to assist the court in interpreting the meaning of the claim terms. These patents relate generally to a triggerable location-reporting apparatus.
IET was retained as a consulting expert in the referenced matter with the option to be designated as a testifying expert. Reviewing devices and documents, IET assisted in the following:
The case was settled out of court.
