David Yates Aug. 16, 2015, 2:46pm


MARSHALL DIVISION

Aug. 11

Gene Reader LLC v. Affymetrix Inc 2:15-cv-01407-JRG-RSP

Plano-based Gene Reader is the complainant.

It is pursuing legal action in response to alleged infringement of United States Patent Numbers 6,545,758 (the '758 patent) and 6,567,163 (the '163 patent).

The ‘758 patent, entitled “Microarray Detector and Synthesizer,” was issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Apr. 8, 2003, while the ‘163 patent, also entitled “Microarray Detector and Synthesizer,” was issued on May 20, 2003.

Attorneys Richard C Weinblatt and Andrew W. Spangler are representing Gene Reader.

TYLER DIVISION

Aug. 12

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Argus Software, Inc 6:15-cv-00739-JRG

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. ECI Software Solutions, Inc. 6:15-cv-00740

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. GlobalSCAPE, Inc. 6:15-cv-00741

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software, Inc. 6:15-cv-00742

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. SolarWinds, Inc. 6:15-cv-00743

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Texas Instruments Incorporated 6:15-cv-00744

Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Maketech Systems, Inc. d/b/a DocuDesk Corporation 6:15-cv-00745

Digital Reg is the plaintiff.

It assumes ownership of U.S. Patent No. 6,389,541 (the ‘541 patent), and alleges infringement of said patent. Court papers claim Digital Reg is suffering financially because of the act in question.

Attorneys Andrew G. DiNovo, Jay D. Ellwanger, Nicole E. Glauser and Stefanie T. Scott of the law firm Dinovo Price Ellwanger & Hardy LLP in Austin serve as the complainant’s counsel.

Aug. 13

Ectolink, LLC v. M&T Bank Corporation 6:15-cv-00752

Ectolink, LLC v. Applied Bank 6:15-cv-00753

Ectolink, LLC v. BancorpSouth Bank 6:15-cv-00754

Ectolink, LLC v. Bank of Hawaii 6:15-cv-00755

Ectolink, LLC v. Capital One N.A. 6:15-cv-00756

Ectolink, LLC v. Comerica Bank 6:15-cv-00757

Plaintiff Ectolink is based in Longview.

It alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,826,245 (the ’245 patent) entitled “Providing Verification Information for a Transaction.”

According to court documents, the ‘245 patent has been litigated previously in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

Ectolink seeks unspecified monetary damages and a jury trial.

Attorney Todd Y. Brandt of the Brandt Law Firm in Longview is representing the complainant.

More News