Recent patent infringement cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas

Michelle Keahey, East Texas Bureau Jul. 8, 2013, 4:06pm


Marshall Division

June 28 

Innovative Display Technologies v. Acer Inc. et al Case No. 2:13-cv-00522

Innovative Display Technologies v. Dell Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00523

Innovative Display Technologies v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Case No. 2:13-cv-00524

Innovative Display Technologies v. Huawei Investment and Holding Co. Ltd. et al Case No. 2:13-cv-00525

Innovative Display Technologies v. Research in Motion Limited et al Case No. 2:13-cv-00526

Innovative Display Technologies v. ZTE Corp. et al Case No. 2:13-cv-00527

Innovative Display Technologies LLC is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Plano.

The defendants are accused of infringing on:

• U.S. Patent No. 6,755,547 issued June 29, 2004, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,300,194 issued Nov. 27, 2007, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,384,177 issued June 10, 2008, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,404,660 issued July 29, 2008, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,434,974 issued Oct. 14, 2008, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,537,370 issued May 26, 2009, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies; and

• U.S. Patent No. 8,215,816 issued July 10, 2012, for Light Emitting Panel Assemblies.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, treble damages, interest, court costs and attorney’s fees.

Innovative Display Technologies is represented by Jeffrey R. Bragalone, Patrick J. Conroy, Justin B. Kimble, T. William Kennedy Jr. and Daniel F. Olejko of Bragalone Conroy PC in Dallas; and T. John Ward Jr. and Claire Abernathy Henry of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview.

A jury trial is requested.

 

July 3

• Quality Night Lights v. Amerasia Enterprises Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00531

• Quality Night Lights v. AmerTac Holdings Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00532

• Quality Night Lights v. Dorel Juvenile Group Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00533

• Quality Night Lights v. Energizer Holdings Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00534

• Quality Night Lights v. Jobar International Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00535

• Quality Night Lights v. Northeastern Plastics Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00536

• Quality Night Lights v. Perfect Oil Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00537

Quality Night Lights is a limited liability company with a place of business in Longview.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,390,647 issued May 21, 2002, for Night Light and U.S. Patent No. 7,874,717, issued Jan. 25, 2011, for Night Light.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, compensatory damages, interest and court costs.

Quality Night Lights is represented by Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Longview, James A. Fussell III of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Alexandria, Va., and Tyler J. Woods of Newport Trial Group in Newport Beach, Calif.

A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the case.

 

Tyler Division

June 25

• Cellular Communications Equipment v. HTC Corp. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00507

• Cellular Communications Equipment v. LG Electronics Inc. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00508

• Cellular Communications Equipment v. Pantech Co. Ltd. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00509

• Cellular Communications Equipment v. Research in Motion Limited et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00510

• Cellular Communications Equipment v. ZTE Corp. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00511

Cellular Communications Equipment is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Plano.

The defendants are accused of infringing on:

• U.S. Patent No. 6,377,804 for Mobile Communication Systems;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,819,923 for Method for Communication of Neighbor Cell Information;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,215,962 for Method for an Intersystem Connection Handover;

• U.S. Patent No. 7,941,174 for Method for Multicode Transmission by a Subscriber Station;

• U.S. Patent No. 8,055,820 for Apparatus, System, and Method for Designating a Buffer Status Reporting Format Based on Detected Pre-Selected Buffer Conditions; and

• U.S. Patent No. 7,218,923 for Control of Terminal Applications in a Network Environment.

The plaintiff is asking for an award of damages, including an ongoing post-judgment royalty, treble damages, interest and court costs.

Cellular Communications is represented by Edward R. Nelson III, Brent N. Bumgardner, Barry J. Bumgardner, S. Brannon Latimer, Thomas C. Cecil and Michael J. Fagan Jr. of Nelson Bumgardner Casto P.C. in Fort Worth; and T. John Ward Jr., J. Wesley Hill and Claire Abernathy Henry of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview.

A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis is assigned to the case.

 

June 28

• Wi-Lan Inc. et al v. HTC Corp. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00519

Wi-LAN is a Canadian corporation with its principal place of business in Ottawa, Ontario.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 8,259,688 issued Sept. 4, 2012, for Pre-Allocated Random Access Identifiers.

The plaintiff is asking the court to issue an injunction preventing the defendants from further acts of infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages and interest.

Wi-Lan is represented by David B. Weaver and Stephen M. Hash of Vinson & Elkins LLP in Austin, David J. Tobin of Vinson & Elkins LLP in Dallas and Purav K. Jesrani of Vinson & Elkins LLP in Houston.

A jury trial is requested.

 

July 1

Dual Digital Media v. Rhapsody International Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00529

Dual Digital Media v. OnLive Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00530

Dual Digital Media is a limited liability company with a principal place of business in Longview.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,925,897 on April 12, 2011, for System, Method and Apparatus for Controlling the Dissemination of Digital Works.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, interest, court costs, compensatory damages and punitive damages.

Dual Digital Media is represented by Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Longview; James A. Fussell III of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Alexandria, Va., and Tyler J. Woods of Newport Trial Group in Newport Beach, Calif.  A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the case.

 

July 3

• CDD Technologies v. Lenovo Group Ltd. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00523

CDD Technologies is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business in Tyler.

The defendant is accused of infringing on:

• U.S. Patent No. 5,734,340 issued March 31, 1998, for Method and Apparatus for Storing Run-Intensive Information in Compact Form;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,002,402 issued Dec. 14, 1999, for System and Method for Producing a Drag-and-Drop Object from a Popup Menu Item; and

• U.S. Patent No. 6,038,379 issued March 14, 2000, for Data Backup and Restore System for a Computer Network Having Generic Remote File System Agents for Providing Backup and Restore Operations.

The plaintiff is asking for an award of damages, interest, costs, expenses and attorney’s fees.

CDD Technologies is represented by Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Longview; James A. Fussell III of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Alexandria, Va., and Stamatios Stamoulis and Richard C. Weinblatt of Stamoulis & Weinblatt in Wilmington, Del.

A jury trial is requested.

 

Lufkin Division

June 25

• Swipe Innovations v. ExaDigm Inc. Case No. 9:13-cv-00197

Swipe is a limited liability company formed with a principal place of business in Houston.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,351,296 issued Sept. 27, 1994, for Financial Transmission System.

Swipe is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, costs, interest and attorney’s fees.

The plaintiff is represented by Larry D. Thompson Jr., Matthew J. Antonelli and Zachariah S. Harrington of Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson in Houston and Stafford Davis of The Stafford Davis Firm in Tyler.

Jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Ron Clark is assigned to the case.

 

 

More News