Smartflash sues US Patent Office in ongoing Apple Racketeering Investigation

USA - English

• USA - Français
• USA - español
• USA - English
• Latin America - español
• USA - Deutsch

LONDON, Oct. 30, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Patrick Racz, founder, and inventor of Smartflash, has announced a lawsuit filed by Smartflash against the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in connection with Smartflash's ongoing Civil RICO investigation into Apple.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a federal law that allows for the prosecution of individuals or organizations engaged in illegal activities as part of a larger criminal enterprise.

In 2015, Racz won a resounding victory against Apple in court, with an initial jury award of $533 million for wilful infringement. The key merits and findings of the case, namely that Apple infringed on the technology and induced others to infringe, remain undisturbed today.

From 2015 to 2018, Racz was then forced to defend a series of costly appeals in separate forums, including 48 individual cases at the Patent Trial Appeal Board (PTAB), where the panels of judges were stacked and comprised of ex lawyers for the defendants, including Apple.

"We have been fighting the US Patent Office tooth and nail for the past 3 years, to obtain copies of multiple unredacted emails and documents that we are fully entitled to receive but have been left with no choice other than suing them" said Racz. "We are committed to protecting our intellectual property and will not rest until justice has been served."

The complaint explains that the USPTO has withheld multiple unredacted documents requested by Smartflash under the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), as part of a "pattern or practice" that impermissibly delays Smartflash's access to relevant government records, that prevents Smartflash from continuing its multi-year investigations into PTAB panel manipulation & panel stacking, evidence of how Smartflash was treated at the USPTO and how the USPTO is falsely claiming deliberative process privilege where none existed.

The complaint explains why the withholding of documents relating to these cases at the PTAB are a matter of great public importance, citing Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch's Opinion in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970, 1993 (2021) and referring to the Apple v Smartflash cases at the PTAB, where former Apple patent defence attorney Matt Clements presided over cases involving his former employer Apple.

For more information or to request an interview contact [email protected] or call Charles Carroll on +44 (0) 20 3176 2700.

For more information about the campaign, visit www.patrickracz.com