Lawyer drops defamation claim against EFF patent blog
A lawyer who accused civil liberties group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) of defaming his character has withdrawn his lawsuit against the organisation’s “stupid” patent blog post.
On Friday (June 5) the EFF confirmed that Scott Horstemeyer, partner at law firm Thomas Horstemeyer, dismissed the case without prejudice, meaning he could potentially re-file a complaint.
Last week, WIPR reported that Horstemeyer had accused the EFF of defaming his character in a blog it published called “Stupid Patent of the Month: Eclipse IP Casts A Shadow Over Innovation”.
The post was written by Daniel Nazer, staff attorney at the EFF, and was published on April 30. Horstemeyer filed the claim on May 26.
Nazer’s article centred on US patent 9,013,334, called “Notification systems and methods that permit change of quantity for delivery and/or pickup of goods and/or services”.
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) granted the patent to Eclipse IP, a client of Horstemeyer’s, on April 21.
In the article, Nazer said Horstemeyer failed to fulfil an “ethical obligation” when he filed the patent application because he did not provide information about an earlier court ruling that centred on other Eclipse patents.
Last September, Judge George Wu of the US District Court for the Central District of California ruled that claims in three patents were invalid because they were too abstract.
Nazer described the ‘334 patent as “stupid” in the blog post.
The article was one in a series of monthly posts that the EFF publishes on what it believes are “stupid” patents issued by the USPTO.
Confirming the withdrawal of the complaint, the EFF said: “We are pleased that he [Horstemeyer] has decided to abandon his misguided and counterproductive litigation.”
But the EFF added it will be prepared to defend itself if Horstemeyer decides to “re-file the meritless lawsuit”.
Jeremy Oczek, partner at law firm Bond Schoeneck & King, told WIPR that he was “surprised” by Horstemeyer’s lawsuit.
He added that it is unlikely that other commentators will worry about writing about “stupid” patents because the EFF’s article was not based on “false statements” and is protected by the First Amendment.
The case was an “anomaly”, Oczek concluded.
Horstemeyer declined to comment.
