GT announced today that Judge Sue L. Robinson of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware ruled that Bally Technologies and its affiliates Bally Gaming International and Bally Gaming, infringed IGT's U.S. Patent Nos. RE37, 885 and RE38, 812.
The court ruled that Bally's "Power Rewards" technology infringed claims 10, 33, and 46 of the '885 patent and claims 21 and 44 of the '812 patent, and that Bally's "ACSC Power Winners" infringed claims 10 and 46 of the '885 patent. The court also granted IGT's motion for summary judgment that the '885 and '812 patents are valid.
In the same order, IGT said that Judge Robinson denied Bally's motion for a ruling that IGT's U.S. Patent No. 6,431,983 is invalid but found that Bally's "SDS Power Winners" did not infringe the '885 patent and that Bally's "Power Bank" and "Power Promotions" did not infringe the '983 patent. Besides, Bally Technologies said that the Court also found that Bally's ACSC Power Winners and ACSC Power Rewards products infringe some asserted patent claims but do not infringe others.
IGT filed this lawsuit against Bally in 2006. IGT said that the lawsuit alleges that the infringement has taken place despite defendants' knowledge that IGT's patents cover the Bally Power Bonusing technology. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages and an injunction. IGT expects there will be a trial to assess damages following a period of related discovery.
On the other hand Bally said that, in the litigation, IGT originally claimed Bally's products infringed some 200 patent claims, but following patent re-examination proceedings and case-related actions, all but eight of the claims were withdrawn.
"We are pleased that the court has affirmed the validity of our patents and their infringement. We believe strongly in the United States patent system and the need to protect our intellectual property and respect the valid intellectual property rights of others," said Patti Hart, IGT's President and CEO.
"For the two products partially in question, the company has undertaken technical changes to ensure non-infringement," said Ramesh Srinivasan, Executive VP of Bally Systems. "The revenues derived from these products to date are immaterial to Bally's financial position." The company affirmed that the decision, as well as victories for Bally in other recent patent cases with IGT involving table games, wheel games, and iVIEW technology, continues to validate Bally's intellectual property strategies.