Worlds.com
Worlds Inc. v. Activision – DISMISSED
Looks like the Worlds Inc v. Activision case has been dismissed, at least for now. In an interesting development, it appears that Activision was successful in arguing that Worlds’ patent attorneys did…
Case Update: Worlds.com Reopened???
In an interesting turn of events, on July 22, 2010, Worlds.com requested that the court reopen its case against NCSoft. The dismissal of the case on April 23, 2010, was conditional on…
Case Update: Worlds.com case SETTLED!
Well folks, looks like Worlds.com v. NCSoft has settled. The court on April 23, 2010, ordered dismissal with prejudice based on a binding settlement agreement between Worlds.com and NCSoft. Terms of the…
Case Update: Worlds.com v. NCSoft (E.D.Tex., filed Dec. 24, 2008)
This litigation has been transferred to the Northern District of California (San Francisco Division). Specifically, NCSoft filed a motion in the Eastern District of Texas alleging that, other than the marketing and…
Case Update: Worlds.com v. NCSoft
Nothing major, but it does look like the case management conference was conducted on Sep. 14, and the claim construction hearing, i.e., Markman hearing, has been set for June 8, 2010: Minute…
News: Worlds.com patent invalid???
Article One Partners is a company that offers rewards to people for finding prior art that can be used to try to invalidate patents, and Article One is willing to pay serious…
Case Update: Worlds.com asserts second patent
Sorry for the delay on this, but on March 23, 2009, Worlds Inc. amended its complaint in the lawsuit against NCSoft to assert a second patent. The lawsuit now involves both of…
Case Update: Worlds.com v. NCSoft
You may recall that Worlds.com sued NCSoft last Christmas Eve in the Eastern District of Texas. In an interesting development, the case has been transferred to the Northern District of California. On…
New Case: Worlds.com v. NCSoft (E.D.Tex., filed Dec. 24, 2008)
Merry Christmas, you’ve been sued. It’s not uncommon for plaintiffs to file lawsuits around the holidays in order to “turn the screws” on defendants, and that appears to be the case here.…