Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas

April 16

  • Immersion Medical Inc. vs. Mentice AB et al

    Plaintiff Immersion Medical has filed an infringement suit regarding four patents for hardware and software for surgical training systems.

    The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent No. 6,106,301 for an Interventional Radiology Interface Apparatus and Method; No. 5,821,920 for a Control Input Device for Interfacing an Elongated Flexible Object with a Computer System; No. 6,323,837 for a Method and Apparatus for Interfacing an Elongated Objected with a Computer System; and No. 5,844,392 for Haptic Browsing. Immersion claims to be the owner of the four patents.

    The suit alleges that Mentice AB and Mentice SA, formerly known as Xitact SA, Simbionix USA and Simbionix Ltd. have infringed the patents-in-suit.

    Immersion Medical alleges that the defendants will continue to infringe the patents unless enjoined by the court. In addition, the plaintiff alleges that the infringements were willful, entitling Immersion to increased damages.

    Plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief, an accounting of all damages sustained by Immersion, actual and enhanced damages, attorneys' fees, costs, interest and other relief that the court may deem just and proper.

    Calvin Capshaw of Capshaw Derieux LLP in Longview is lead counsel for the plaintiff, with attorneys from Howrey LLP of San Francisco, Calif.

    The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham.
    Case No. 2:08-cv-161-TJW-CE

    April 21

  • LSI Corp. et al vs. United Microelectronics Corp. et al

    Plaintiffs LSI Corp. and its wholly-owned subsidiary Agere Systems Inc. claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent No. 5,227,335 B1 for Tungsten Metallization issued July 13, 1993.

    The suit names 18 companies, predominantly companies based in Taiwan and Japan, have infringed the '335 Patent. Defendants include United Microelectronics, Integrated Device Technology, Freescale Semiconductor, Microchip Technology, Nanya Technology, National Semiconductor, Promos Technologies and Vanguard International.

    Infringing products named in the suit include field programmable gate array, synchronous SRAM, flash programmable clock generator, concurrent superflash memory, FLASH microcontroller, MPEG audio decoder, bandwidth converter and power transistor products made or sold by the defendants.

    LSI is seeking injunctive relief, reasonable royalty, treble damages, interest, attorneys' fees, costs and other just and proper relief.

    Elizabeth DeRieux of Capshaw & DeRieux LLP in Longview is representing the plaintiff. Attorneys from Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP of Denver, Colo., are of counsel.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward.

    Case No. 2:08-cv-165-TJW

    April 22

  • Aerielle Technologies Inc. et al vs. Wireless Xcessories Group Inc.

    Plaintiffs Aerielle Technologies Inc. and Aerielle Inc. claim that Wireless Xcessories has infringed on at least two Aerielle patents.

    The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,671,494 and 5,771,441 for a Small, Battery Operated RF Transmitter for Portable Audio Devices for Use with Headphones with RF Receiver issued to John James on Dec. 30, 2003, and to John E. Alstatt on June 23, 1998, respectively.

    "The '441 Patent and the '494 Patent have been assigned to Aerille who is their current owner with full rights to sue and recover damages and otherwise enforce the '441 Patent and the '494 Patent," the original complaint states.

    Aerielle also alleges that WX's infringement has been willful, deliberate and intentional. The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, injunctive relief, treble damages, interest, attorneys' fees, costs and other relief.

    Michael Smith of Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips & Smith LLP in Marshall is representing the plaintiff along with attorneys from Taylor, Dunham & Burgess LLP in Austin.

    The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham.

    Case No. 2:08-cv-167-TJW-CE

    Texarkana Division, Eastern District of Texas

    April 21

  • Datatern Inc. vs. Bank of America Corp. et al

    Texas-based Datatern Inc. claims it is owner-by-assignment of U.S. Patent No. 5,937,402 for a System for Enabling Access to a Relational Database from an Object Oriented Program issued Aug. 10, 1999.

    Datatern alleges that 24 defendants have infringed the '402 Patent. Included as defendants in the suit are Bank of America, Delta Airlines, Expedia, Hotels.com, TripAdvisor, Hilton Hotels, Hampton Inns, Conrad Hotels, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, QVC, Red Hat, Sharp, Visa and Wachovia Corp.

    The defendants infringe the '402 Patent through the use of "object oriented source codes to employ objects that are populated with information from a relational database," the complaint states.

    "As a result of these defendants' infringement of the '402 Patent, plaintiff has suffered monetary damages in an amount not yet determined, and will continue to suffer damages in the future unless defendants' infringing activities are enjoined by this court," the suit states.

    Datatern is also seeking enhanced damages for the defendants' alleged deliberate and willful infringement, costs, interest, attorneys' fees and other relief.

    Daniel F. Perez of the Perez Law Firm in Dallas, Patrick R. Anderson of Flint, Mich., and Andrew Spangler of Spangler Law PC in Longview are representing the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge David Folsom.

    Case No. 5:08-cv-070-DF

    Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas

    April 18

  • Triton IP LLC vs. NetSuite Inc. et al

    Plaintiff Triton IP is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Marshall. Triton claims it is the owner-by-assignment of U.S. Patent No. 6,067,525 for an Integrated Computerized Sales Force Automation System issued May 23, 2000.

    Triton alleges that defendants NetSuite, CDC Corp. and CDC Software have infringed the '525 Patent through software products and services used for managing customer relations, resources, supply chains, finances, orders, human capital, business analytics and marketing.

    The plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction against defendants, damages, costs, expenses, interest, attorneys' fees and "restitution of benefits defendants have gained through their unfair, deceptive or illegal acts."

    In addition, Triton reserves the right to request a finding that the infringements have been willful, entitling it to enhanced damages.

    Andrew Spangler of Spangler Law PC in Marshall is lead counsel for the plaintiff, along with John J. Edmonds of Houston and David M. Pridham of Barrington, R.I.

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

    Case No. 6:08-cv-142-LED

  • Realtime Data LLC dba IXO vs. Packeteer Inc. et al

    Plaintiff Realtime Data doing business as IXO, states it has developed "many methods of compression-based data acceleration" which it incorporated into software and hardware-based data acceleration products.

    "These products included various hardware data accelerators ranging from expansion cards to rack-mounted storage servers," the original complaint states. "In this regard, Realtime Data has worked with some of the largest technology companies in the world, including the development of custom solutions for major financial institutions."

    In its patent infringement complaint, Realtime claims it holds the rights to seven patents, including U.S. Patent No. 6,601,104.

    The suit names manufacturers Packeteer, Citrix, Expand Networks, F5 Networks, and their customers 7-Eleven, ABM Industries, Averitt Express, Build-A-Bear Workshop, DHL Express, Interstate Battery and O'Reilly Automotive as infringing on the Realtime patents.

    Realtime alleges that defendants have and are using or selling one or more data acceleration products covered by the patents without license or authorization from Realtime Data.

    Realtime is seeking injunctive relief, costs, attorneys' fees, interest and treble damages for willful infringement.

    Mike Jones and John Bufe of Potter Minton in Tyler are representing the plaintiff. Attorneys from Ropes & Gray LLP in New York, N.Y., are of counsel.

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

    Case No. 6:08-cv-144-LED

    Lufkin Division, Eastern District of Texas

    April 21

  • Aisin AW Co. Ltd. vs. TomTom

    Plaintiff Aisin, a Japanese corporation, claims it is a "leading manufacturer of sophisticated automobile components."

    "Aisin is the world's number one manufacturer of automatic transmissions," the plaintiff's original complaint states. "Aisin is a pioneer in the development of car navigation systems. Aisin supplies those car navigation systems to automobile manufacturers around the world."

    The complaint names three patents-in-suit to which Aisin claims it holds the rights:

  • U.S. Patent No. 5,587,911 for a Navigation System with Selective Intersection Display issued to Hitoshi Asano, Wataru Ishikawa and Mitsuhiro Nimura on Dec. 24, 1996.
  • U.S. Patent No. 5,612,881 for a Map Display System issued to Syuzo Moroto, Koji Sumiya, Yasunobu Ito, Kunihiro Yamada, Mitsuhiro Nimura and Takeshi Yano on March 18, 1997.
  • U.S. Patent No. 5,931,888 for a Navigation System for Vehicles with Alternative Route Searching Capabilities issued Toyoji Hiyokawa on Aug. 3, 1999.

    Aisin claims the entire right, title and interest to the patents are assigned to Aisin.

    The plaintiff alleges that defendants TomTom NV, TomTom International BV and TomTom Inc. have infringed on the Aisin patents.

    The suit states that the TomTom companies have been and still are infringing the Aisin patent claims by making, using, selling personal navigation devices or importing them into the United States.

    "The TomTom companies' infringement of the patents have caused and will continue to cause Aisin irreparable harm unless enjoined by this court," the complaint states. "Aisin has no adequate remedy at law."

    The plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, treble damages for willful infringement, costs, attorneys' fees and other just and proper relief.

    Michael Smith of Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips & Smith LLP in Marshall is representing the plaintiff. Attorneys from Ropes & Gray LLP in New York, N.Y., are of counsel.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Ron H. Clark.

    Case No. 9:08-cv-070-RHC

  • More News