Recent patent infringement cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas

Marilyn Tennissen Dec. 19, 2014, 6:13pm


MARSHALL DIVISION

Dec. 16 

• Hitachi Maxell Ltd. v Top Victory Electronics (Taiwan) Co. Ltd. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01121

Plaintiff Hitachi Maxell is a Japanese corporation.

The defendants named in the suit are Top Victory Eelectronics (Taiwan) Co. Ltd., TPV International (USA) Inc., Envision Peripherals Inc., Top Victory Electronics (FUJIAN) Co. Ltd., TPV Electronics (FUJIAN) Co. Ltd., TPV Technology Ltd. and TPV Display Technology (XIAMEN) Co. Ltd.

The patents-in-suit are:

• U.S. Patent No. 6,037,995 issued March 14, 2000, for a Broadcasting and Communication Receiver Apparatus;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,388,713 issued May 14, 2002, for an Image Display Apparatus and Method to Prevent or Limit User Adjustment of Displayed Image Quality;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,144,412 issued Nov. 7, 2000, for a Method and Circuit for Signal Processing of Format Conversion of Picture Signal;

• U.S. Patent No. 8,009,375 issued Aug. 30, 2011, for an Apparatus and Method for Receiving and Recording Digital Information;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,924,366 issued April 12, 2011, for an Image Displaying Apparatus; and

• U.S. Patent No. 8,913,197 issued Dec. 16, 2014, for a Digital Broadcast Receiver Unit.

Defendants’ products that allegedly infringe the patents-in-suit include televisions that display an on-screen guide or menu, make changes to picture settings or have mobile HD link interfacing.

The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages, treble damages for willful infringement, interest, costs, attorneys’ fees and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Lead attorney for the plaintiff is Martin J. Black of Dechert LLP in Philadelphia, Penn.

The cases have been assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and referred to Magistrate Judge Roy Payne for pretrial proceedings.

 

• Packet Intelligence LLC v Cisco Systems Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01122

Plaintiff Packet Intelligence is a Texas limited liability company based in Marshall.

Cisco Systems is accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,771,646 issued Aug. 3, 2004, for an Associate Cache Structure for Lookups and Updates of Flow Records in a Network Monitor.

Defendant’s allegedly infringing products include Cisco Service Control Application for Mobile Networks, Cisco Service Control Application for Broadband Networks, Cisco Application Visibility and Control, Network Based Application Recognition and Cisco Prime Network Analysis Module 6.1.

Packet Intelligence claims Cisco had prior knowledge of the ‘646 Patent since at least May 1, 2005.

The plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction, compensatory and enhanced damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Counsel for the plaintiff are Brooke Taylor, Shawn Blackburn and LeElle Krompass of Susman Godfrey LLP; Michael Heim and Robert A. Bullwinkel of Heim Payne & Chorush LLP; T. John Ward Jr. and Claire Abernathy Henry of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview and S. Calvin Capshaw III of Capshaw DeRieux LLP in Gladewater.

The case has been assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

 

Dec. 17

• Better Mouse Co. LLC v Dell Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01123

• Better Mouse Co. LLC v Logitech Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01157

Plaintiff Better Mouse Co. (BMC) is a Texas limited liability company based in Tyler.

The defendants are accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,532,200 issued May 12, 2009, for an Apparatus for Setting Multi-Stage Displacement Resolution of a Mouse.

Allegedly infringing products include Alienware TactX Mouse, Dell Laser Mouse and G100s Optical Gaming Mouse.

BMC is seeking a permanent injunction against defendants, damages, costs, interest, attorneys’ fees and other just and proper relief. A jury trial is demanded.

Plaintiff’s attorneys are lead attorney Larry D. Thompson Jr. of Antonelli Harrington & Thompson LLP in Houston and Stafford Davis of Tyler.

The cases have been assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

 

Dec. 18

• BSG Tech LLC v Beauty Encounter Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01124

• BSG Tech LLC v Bodybuilding.com LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-01125

• BSG Tech LLC v The Bon-Ton Department Stores Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01126

• BSG Tech LLC v DiscountRamps.com LLC Case No. 2:4-cv-01127

• BSG Tech LLC v Fat Brain Toys LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-01128

• BSG Tech LLC v HRM USA Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01129

• BSG Tech LLC v HSN Inc. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01130

• BSG Tech LLC v Musicnotes Inc. dba Musicnotes.com Case No. 2:14-cv-01131

• BSG Tech LLC v Protocol II Inc. dba Artbeads.com Case No. 2:14-cv-01132

• BSG Tech LLC v Sears Holdings Management Corp. Case No. 2:14-cv-01133

• BSG Tech LLC v Sur La Table Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01134

• BSG Tech LLC v XO Group Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01135

Plaintiff BSG Tech is a Texas limited liability company based in Plano.

The patents-in-suit are:

• U.S. Patent No. 6,035,294 issued March 7,2000, for Wide Access Databases and Database Systems;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,195,652 issued Feb. 27, 2001, for a Self-Evolving Database and Method of Using Same; and

• U.S. Patent No. 6,243,699 issued June 5, 2001, for Systems and Methods of Indexing and Retrieving Data.

BSG is seeking compensatory damages, costs, interest and other just and proper relief. A jury trial is demanded.

The attorney for the plaintiff is David R. Bennett of Direction IP Law in Chicago, Ill.

The cases have been assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

 

Dec. 18

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v AT&T Mobility LLC et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01136

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Sprint Corp. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01137

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v T-Mobile USA Inc. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01138

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01139

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v TCT Mobile (US) Inc. dba Alcatel One Touch et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01140

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Amazon.com Inc. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01141

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Apple Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01142

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v BlackBerry Corp. Case No. 2:14-cv-01144

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Casio America Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01145

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v HTC America Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01146

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Huawei Technologies USA Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01147

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Kyocera Communications Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01148

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v LG Electronics MobileComm USA Inc. et al Case No. 2:14-cv-01149

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Microsoft Corp. Case No. 2:14-cv-01150

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Motorola Mobility Co. LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-01151

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Pantech Wireless Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01152

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Samsung Telecommunications America LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-01153

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Sharp Electronics Corp. Case No. 2:14-cv-01154

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01155

• Dynamic Hosting Co. LLC v ZTE (USA) Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01156

Plaintiff Dynamic Hosting is a Texas limited liability company with a principal place of business in Tyler.

The patents-in-suit are:

• U.S. Patent No. 5,826,026 issued Oct. 20, 1998, for an Internet Message Communicator with Direct Output to a Hard Copy Device; and

• U.S. Patent No. 6,216,156 issued April 10, 2001, for an Internet Message Communicator with Direct Output to a Hard Copy Device.

Defendants allegedly infringe the plaintiff’s patents by making, using or selling mobile phones with a visual voicemail app that connects over cellular networks, including: Amazon Fire Phone, Apple iPhone 3G, Apple iPhone 3GS, Apple iPhone 4, Apple iPhone 4S, Apple iPhone 5, Apple iPhone 5c, Apple iPhone 5s, Apple iPhone 6, Apple iPhone 6 Plus, Apple Original iPhone, ASUS PadFone X, ASUS PadFone X mini, AT&T Avail, AT&T Avail 2, AT&T Fusion, AT&T Fusion 2, AT&T Impulse 4G, AT&T Radiant, AT&T Tribute, AT&T Z998, BlackBerry Bold, BlackBerry Curve, BlackBerry Pearl, BlackBerry Q10, BlackBerry Torch, BlackBerry Z10, HTC Aria (A6366), HTC Desire 610, HTC Desire EYE, HTC First, HTC HD7S, HTC Inspire 4G, HTC One (M8), HTC One (M8) for Windows, HTC One, HTC One mini, HTC One VX, HTC One X, HTC One X+, HTC Status, HTC Surround, HTC TITAN II, HTC Vivid, HTC Vivid OS 4.0, HTC Windows Phone 8X, Kyocera DuraForce, LG Encore, LG Escape, LG G Flex, LG G Vista, LG G2, LG G3, LG G3 Vigor, LG Nitro HD, LG Optimus G, LG Optimus G Pro, LG Phoenix, LG Quantum, LG Thrill 4G, LG Thrive, Motorola ATRIX 2, Motorola ATRIX 4G, Motorola ATRIX HD, Motorola BACKFLIP, Motorola BRAVO, Motorola FLIPOUT, Motorola FLIPSIDE, Motorola Moto G, Motorola Moto X, Motorola Nexus 6, NEC Terrain, Nokia Lumia 1020, Nokia Lumia 1520, Nokia Lumia 520, Nokia Lumia 635, Nokia Lumia 820, Nokia Lumia 830, Nokia Lumia 900, Nokia Lumia 920, Nokia Lumia 925, Pantech Burst, Pantech Crossover, Pantech Discover, Pantech Flex, Samsung ATIV S Neo, Samsung Captivate, Samsung Captivate Glide, Samsung DoubleTime, Samsung Focus, Samsung Focus II, Samsung Focus Flash, Samsung Focus S, Samsung Galaxy Alpha, Samsung Galaxy Appeal, Samsung Galaxy Exhilarate, Samsung Galaxy Mega, Samsung Galaxy Mega 2, Samsung Galaxy Note, Samsung Galaxy Note 3, Samsung Galaxy Note 4, Samsung Galaxy Note Edge, Samsung Galaxy Note II, Samsung Galaxy Rugby Pro, Samsung Galaxy S4, Samsung Galaxy S4 Active, Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini, Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom, Samsung Galaxy S5, Samsung Galaxy S5 Active, Samsung Galaxy SII, Samsung Galaxy SII Skyrocket, Samsung Galaxy SIII, Samsung Galaxy SIII mini, Samsung Infuse 4G, Samsung Rugby Smart, Sharp FX PLUS, Sonim XP6, Sony Xperia Ion, Sony Xperia TL, Sony Xperia Play 4G, Sony Xperia X10, ZTE Compel and ZTE Z667.

Dynamic Hosting is seeking compensatory damages, costs, treble damages for willful infringement, interest, attorneys’ fees and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Matthew J. Antonelli of Antonelli Harrington & Thompson LLP in Houston is lead attorney for the plaintiff, along with Stafford Davis of Tyler.

 

More News