Recent patent infringement suits filed in the Eastern District of Texas

.
Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas

April 2

  • Acqis LLC vs. Appro International Inc. et al

    Plaintiff Acqis is a Texas limited liability corporation with a principal place of business in McKinney. The infringement complaint concerns eight patents dealing with multiple computer modules to which Acqis claims to own the rights.

    The patents-in-suit are:

  • U.S. Patent No. 6,216,185 issued April 10, 2001, for a Personal Computer Peripheral Console with Attached Computer Module
  • U.S. Patent No. 6,718,415 issued April 6, 2004, for a Computer System and Method Including Console Housing Multiple Computer Modules
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,099,981 issued Aug. 29, 2006, for a Multiple Module Computer System and Method
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,146,446 issued Dec. 5, 2006, for a Multiple Module Computer System and Method
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,328,297 issued Feb. 5, 2008, for a Computer System Utilizing Multiple Computer Modules Functioning Independently
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,363,415 issued April 22, 2008, for a Computer System Utilizing Multiple Computer Modules with Serial Interface
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,363,416 issued April 22, 2008, for a Computer System Utilizing Multiple Computer Modules with Password Protection
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,376,779 issued May 20, 2008, for a Multiple Module Computer System and Method

    All of the patents-in-suit were issued to William W.Y. Chu and assigned to Acqis.

    Acqis alleges that 11 computer manufacturers are infringing its patents.

    The defendants are Appro International Inc., Clearcube Technology Inc., Dell Inc., Fujitsu Computer Systems Corp., Hitachi America Ltd., Hewlett-Packard Co., International Business Machines Corp., NEC Corp. of America, Nexcom Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc. and Super Micro Computers Inc.

    "Defendants have directly and contributorily infringed and have induced others to infringe one or more claims of the (patents-in-suit) by without authorization making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing in and into the United States infringing blade server products within this district and elsewhere," the complaint states.

    The plaintiff claims it has suffered irreparable harm for which it has no adequate remedy at law unless defendants are enjoined by the court.

    Acqis is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, interest, attorneys' fees, costs and other just and proper relief.

    George E. Chandler of Chandler Law Offices in Lufkin and attorneys from Cooley Godward Kronish in Colorado and California are representing the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:09-cv-148-LED

    April 6

  • Parallel Networks LLC vs. Amazon.com Inc. et al

    Plaintiff Parallel Networks is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business in Tyler.

    It claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,466,111 B1 issued Sept. 3, 2002, for a Method and Apparatus for Client-Server Communication Using a Limited Capability Client Over a Low-Speed Communications Link.

    The suit names Amazon.com, Google Inc. and Kayak Software Corp. as defendants who infringe the '111 Patent.

    According to the complaint, the defendants transact business by soliciting advertising from Texas companies and operating Internet Web sites accessible to Texas residents including www.amazon.com, www.kayak.com and www.google.com which infringe the '111 Patent.

    Parallel Networks is seeking to recover damages adequate to compensate it for the infringements no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, an injunction against the defendants and other just and proper relief.

    T. John Ward Jr. of Longview is representing the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:09-cv-154-LED

    April 7

  • Innovative Global Systems Inc. vs. Turnpike Global Technologies LLC et al

    Plaintiff Innovative Global Systems claims to own the rights to five United States patents regarding systems for communicating between a vehicle and a remote data terminal.

    The patents-in-suit are:

  • U.S. Patent No. 6,608,554 issued Aug. 19, 2003, for an Apparatus and Method for Data Communication Between Vehicle and Remote Data Communication Terminal.
  • U.S. Patent No. 6,411,203 issued June 25, 2002, for an Apparatus and Method for Data Communication Between Heavy Duty Vehicle and Remote Data Communication Terminal.
  • U.S. Patent No. 6,744,352 issued June 1, 2004, a System, Apparatus and Method for Data Communication Between Vehicle and Remote Data Communication Terminal, Between Portions of Vehicle and Other Portions of Vehicle, Between Two or More Vehicles and Between Vehicle and Communications Network.
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,015,800 issued March 21, 2006, for a System, Apparatus and Method for Data Communication Between Vehicle and Remote Data Communication Terminal, Between Portions of Vehicle and Other Portions of Vehicle, Between Two or More Vehicles and Between Vehicle and Communications Network.
  • U.S. Patent No. 7,449,993 issued Nov. 11, 2008, for a System, Apparatus and Method for Data Communication Between Vehicle and Remote Data Communication Terminal, Between Portions of Vehicle and Other Portions of Vehicle, Between Two or More Vehicles and Between Vehicle and Communications Network.

    According to the suit, IGS obtained the rights to the patents-in-suit by assignment from Vehicle Enhancement Systems Inc. on Jan. 29.

    Generally speaking, these patents relate to products used and sold to vehicle fleets that permit data communication associated with a vehicle to be transmitted between the vehicle and a remote data terminal so that various operating characteristics of the vehicle can be used, observed or monitored.

    The plaintiff alleges that the patents-in-suit have been and are being infringed by defendants Turnpike Global Technologies, Cadec Global Inc., Xata Corp., General Electric Co., Trimble Navigation Ltd. and Network Fleet Inc.

    In addition, IGS and its predecessor VES provided infringement notice to at least Turnpike Global, the suit states.

    IGS is seeking compensatory damages, treble damages, interest, attorneys' fees, costs and any other just and proper relief.

    Eric Albritton of Longview and attorneys from Friedman, Suder & Cooke in Fort Worth and Wong, Cabello, Lutsch, Rutherford & Brucculeri LLP in Houston are representing the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:09-cv-157-LED

    April 14

  • Davis-Lynch Inc. vs. Hilcorp Energy Co. et al

    Plaintiff Davis-Lynch is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business in Pearland. The plaintiff claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,679,336 issued Jan. 20, 2004, for a Multi-Purpose Float Equipment and Method.

    The application for the '336 Patent was filed on Oct. 17, 2001, as a continuation-in-part of U.S. Patent No. 6,401,824 which issued on June 11, 2002.

    According to the suit, 13 companies are infringing the '336 Patent. The defendants are Hilcorp Energy Co., McRae Energy Corp., McRae Exploration & Production Inc., Merit Energy Co. LLC, Millennium Offshore Group Inc., National Energy Group Inc., Neumin Production Co., Reef Exploration LP, Ridgelake Energy Inc., Tucker Energy Services USA Inc., Weatherford US LP, WUS Holding LLC and Weatherford International Inc.

    The suit states that the court has jurisdiction over the case because all but one of the companies has its principal place of business in Texas. Defendant Ridgelake Energy is a Louisiana company based in Metairie.

    Davis-Lynch alleges the defendants are infringing the '336 Patent and have caused and will cause Davis-Lynch irreparable injury and damage by using or selling mid-bore and large-bore auto-fill float equipment. The plaintiff also alleges the infringements have been willful.

    The plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory and enhanced damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees and other just and appropriate relief.

    Eric M. Boyd of Mehaffy Weber PC in Houston is attorney-in-charge for the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:09-cv-168-LED
  • More Stories