March 2

Raytheon Company v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al 2:15-cv-00341-JRG-RSP

Raytheon Company v. Sony Kabushiki Kaisha et al 2:15-cv-00342-JRG-RSP

Plaintiff is a Plano company.

Raytheon seeks a judgment of infringement by Defendants of U.S. Patent No. 5,591,678 (the “’678 Patent”) entitled “Process of Manufacturing a

Microelectric Device using a Removable Support Substrate and Etch-Stop.”

Longview attorney William Davis III represents the plaintiff.


March 10

Saint Lawrence Communications v. ZTE Corporation et al 2:15-cv-00349-JRG

Saint Lawrence Communications LLC v. Sony Mobile Communications 2:15-cv-00350-JRG

Saint Lawrence Communications LLC v. Motorola Mobility LLC 2:15-cv-00351-JRG

Plaintiff is a Plano company.

On Sept. 21, 2004, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) duly and legally issued United States Patent No. 6,795,805 (“the ’805 Patent”), entitled

“Periodicity Enhancement in Decoding Wideband Signals.” St. Lawrence holds all rights, title, and interest in and to the ’805 Patent.

The plaintiff also claims infringement of the 7.260,521 and 7,191,123 patents

The suit accuses the defendants of using the tech in their HD voice products.

The plaintiff is represented by Demetrios Anaipakos, attorney for the Houston law firm Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing.


March 13

Eclipse IP LLC v. Alfa Vitamin Laboratories, Inc. 2:15-cv-00353

Eclipse IP LLC v. American Fitness Wholesalers, LLC 2:15-cv-00354

Eclipse IP LLC v. Dick Blick Holdings, Inc. 2:15-cv-00355

Eclipse IP LLC v. eSupplements LLC 2:15-cv-00356

Eclipse IP LLC v. Fred Perry USA, Inc. 2:15-cv-00357

Eclipse IP LLC v. Hammer Nutrition, Ltd 2:15-cv-00358

The plaintiff is a Florida company.

On Jan. 15, 2008, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and lawfully issued

United States Patent No. 7,319,414 (the “‘414 patent”), entitled “Secure notification messaging systems and methods using authentication indicia.”

On information and belief, defendants have directly infringe by selling computer-based notification systems and methods to, for example monitor travel data in connection with orders placed via defendants’ website.

Plano attorney Craig Tadlock represents the plaintiff.



March 10

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Bluestem Brands, Inc. 6:15-cv-00170-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Inc. 6:15-cv-00171-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. CafePress Inc. 6:15-cv-00172-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. CDW Corporation 6:15-cv-00174-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Inc. 6:15-cv-00175-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Colony Brands, Inc. 6:15-cv-00177-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Beachbody, LLC 6:15-cv-00178-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Disney Store USA, LLC 6:15-cv-00179-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Edible Arrangements, LLC 6:15-cv-00180-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. The Gap Inc. 6:15-cv-00181-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Brown Shoe Company, Inc. 6:15-cv-00182-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Hayneedle Inc. 6:15-cv-00183-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Karmaloop, Inc. 6:15-cv-00184-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Keurig Green Mountain, Inc. 6:15-cv-00185-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. One Kings Lane Inc. 6:15-cv-00186-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. U.S. Auto Parts Network, Inc. 6:15-cv-00187-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. W.W. Grainger Inc. 6:15-cv-00188-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. eBags, Inc. 6:15-cv-00189-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. GameFly Inc. 6:15-cv-00190-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Nasty Gal Inc. 6:15-cv-00191-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v., Inc. 6:15-cv-00192-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Zazzle Inc. 6:15-cv-00193-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. 6:15-cv-00194-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. JP Boden Services Inc. et al 6:15-cv-00195-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Gander Direct Marketing Services, LLC 6:15-cv-00196-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, INC. 6:15-cv-00198-RWS-KNM

Qommerce Systems, LLC v. Ellison Systems, Inc. d/b/a 6:15-cv-00199-RWS-KNM

Plaintiff is a Tyler company.

Plaintiff is the owner by assignment of the 7,356,606 Patent entitled “Dynamic Web

Storefront Technology.”

The patent involves tech used in conducting commerce over the Internet.

Longview attorney Todd Brandt represents the plaintiff.

More News