Recent patent infringement cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas

Marilyn Tennissen Nov. 11, 2014, 8:26am


Nov. 5 

Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd. v Cisco Systems Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-01018

Ramot is an Israeli limited liability company located in Tel Aviv University. Ramot is Tel Aviv University’s technology transfer company and acts as TAU’s liaison to industry, bringing scientific discoveries made at the university to the attention of the private sector, according to the suit.

It claims to manage a portfolio of more than 2,200 patents and patent applications worldwide, more than 350 U.S. patents and more than 300 U.S. patent applications.

According to the complaints, each of the inventors of the patents-in-suit was affiliated with TAU’s School of Electrical Engineering and each assigned his rights to the patents-in-suit to Ramot.

The patents-in-suit are:

• U.S. Patent No. 8,044,835 issued Oct. 25, 2011, for a Linearized Optical Digital-to-Analog Modulator; and
• U.S. Patent No. 8,797,198 issued Aug. 5, 2014, for Linearized Optical Digital-to-Analog Modulator.

The inventors of the ‘835 and ‘198 patents are listed as Yossef Ehrlichman, Ofer Amrani and Shlomo Ruschin.

The patents-in-suit address the need for high-performance and large bandwidth digital to analog signal conversion. The inventions described relate to systems and modules containing optical modulators and in particular linearized optical digital-to-analog modulators.

Cisco’s allegedly infringing products include CPAK 100G portfolio, including the CPAK-SR10 and CPAK-LR4 products.

Ramot claims Cisco has been aware of the ‘835 Patent since April 2012.

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

J. Thad Heartfield and Dru Montgomery of The Heartfield Law Firm in Beaumont are representing the plaintiff.


Nov. 7

National Oilwell Varco DHT LP v Amega West Services LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-01020

Plaintiff National Oilwell Varco is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of business in Houston.

NOV claims to be the owner of:

• U.S. Patent No. 6,279,670 issued Aug. 28, 2001, for a Downhole Flow Pulsing Apparatus;

• U.S. Patent No. 6,431,294 issued Aug. 13, 2002, for a Percussive Tool; and

• U.S. Patent No. 6,508,317 issued Jan. 21, 2003, for a Downhole Apparatus and Method of Use.

Defendant Amega is allegedly infringing the NOV patents through its Amega VIBE vibration tool.

NOV is seeking a permanent injunction against defendant, compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, costs, enhanced damages and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Robert J. McAughan Jr. is attorney in charge for the plaintiff along with Jeffrey Andrews and David Terrell of Sutton McAughan Deaver PLLc in Houston.



Nov. 7

Qonduit LLC v Cambridge Investment Research Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00837
Qonduit LLC v Cetera Financial Investment Research Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00839
Qonduit LLC v FSC Securities Corp. Case No. 6:14-cv-00839
Qonduit LLC v National Planning Corp. Case No. 6:14-cv-00840
Qonduit LLC v NFP Securities Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00841
Qonduit LLC v Raymond James Financial Services Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00842
Qonduit LLC v Royal Alliance Associates Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00843
Qonduit LLC v Securian Financial Services Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00844
Qonduit LLC v Securities America Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00845
Qonduit LLC v Signator Investors Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00846

Plaintiff Qonduit is a Texas limited liability company located in Tyler.

Defendants are accused of infringing on:

• U.S. Patent No. 5,655,085 for a Computer System for Automated Comparing of Universal Life Insurance Policies Based on Selectable Criteria; and

• U.S. Patent No. 5,673,402 issued for a Computer System for Producing an Illustration of an Investment Repaying a Mortgage.

According to the complaints, the ‘085 Patent is a prominent patent in the insurance and financial services field and has been forward-cited as prior art in connection with the examination of subsequently-issued U.S. patents, including patents issued to such prominent companies as JP Morgan Chase, Teradata, Computer Science Corporation, Genworth, Accenture, SAP, The Hartford, Travelers, Bank of America, USAA, Progressive, Aetna, Citibank, ESpeed, Fannie Mae, Ford, HP, Hitachi, IBM, Lincoln National, Marsh, Mass Mutual, New York Life, Oracle, Swiss Re and Versata.

According to the suits, the ‘402 Patent has been forward cited in patents issued to Computer Sciences Corp., Accenture, Genworth, Fannie Mae, Bank of America, Met Life, Capital One, Citibank, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Safeco, USAA, Wells Fargo, BMO, Freddie Mac, Intuit, Liberty Mutual, Mass Mutual and Swiss Re.

Defendants infringe by making or using network-based computer systems to accomplish sales, processing and maintenance of insurance policies that contain provisions regarding the repayment of a mortgage,(e.g. mortgage riders, mortgage life insurance, mortgage protection, mortgage coverage) and produce illustrations relating to such policies.

The plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, attorneys’ fees, interest, costs and other relief to which it may be entitled. A jury trial is demanded.

Craig Tadlock, John J. Harvey Jr. and Keith Smiley of Tadlock Law Firm PLLC in Plano are representing the plaintiff.

More News