Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas

April 24

  • Gellyfish Technologies LLC vs. Acer America Corp. et al

    Plaintiff Gellyfish Technologies claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,963,486 for Hand Pads for Laptop Computers and Other Electronic Devices and U.S. Patent No. 6,336,614 for Conformable Portable Computer Hand Pads.

    The plaintiff alleges that Acer America Corp., Acer Inc. and Gateway Inc. have infringed the Gellyfish patents.

    The suit states that Acer and Gateway infringe the '486 and '614 Patents by making, using and selling specialized laptop computer products that are covered by the patents without authority or license from Gellyfish.

    The suit also alleges that the infringing acts are willful and deliberate.

    The plaintiff is seeking damages adequate to compensate Gellyfish for the acts of infringement, treble damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees, injunctive relief and other just and proper relief.

    Andrew Spangler of the Spangler Law Firm in Longview is representing the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 2:08-cv-170-TJW

    April 25

  • Technology Properties Ltd. and Patriot Scientific Corp. vs. HTC Corp. and HTC America Inc.
  • Technology Properites Ltd. and Patriot Scientific Corp. vs. Acer Inc., Acer America Corp. and Gateway Inc.
  • Technology Properties Ltd. and Patriot Scientific Corp. vs. HTC Corp., HTC America Inc. and ASUSTek Computer Inc.
  • Technology Properties Ltd. and MCM Portfolio LLC vs. ASUSTek Computer Inc.
  • Technology Properites Ltd. and Patriot Scientific Corp. vs. Acer Inc., Acer America Corp. and Gateway Inc.
  • Technology Properties Ltd., MCM Portfolio LLC and Patriot Scientific Corp. vs. ASUSTek Computer Inc.

    Technology Properties Ltd. of Cupertino, Calif., is plaintiff in six patent infringement suits filed April 25 in federal court in Marshall against a variety of defendants dealing with several different patents.

    In one set of suits against HTC Corp., Acer and ASUSTeK Computer, the plaintiffs allege the defendants have infringed on microprocessor patents including U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336 for a High Performance Microprocessor Having Variable Speed System Clock.

    In another set against HTC Corp., Acer, Gateway and ASUSTeK Computer, the plaintiffs allege the defendants have infringed on U.S. Patent No. 5,784,584 for a High Performance Microprocessor Using Instructions That Operate Within Instruction Groups.

    Each suit seeks relief for the plaintiffs in damages to adequately compensate for the infringement, interest, costs, attorneys' fees, enhanced damages and other just and proper relief.

    Elizabeth DeRieux of Capshaw DeRieux LLP in Longview is representing the plaintiff in all six suits.

    The cases have been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward.

    Case Nos:
    2:08-cv-172
    2:08-cv-173
    2:08-cv-174
    2:08-cv-175
    2:08-cv-176
    2:08-cv-177

    April 28

  • Mitchell Corp. of Owosso Inc. vs. General Motors Corp.

    Two Michigan companies are involved in the patent infringement suit over seat belt design.

    According to the original complaint, plaintiff Mitchell manufactures auto parts and accessories, primarily vehicle seats, seat covers and seat frames. Mitchell claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent No. 5,547,259 which covers a method and apparatus for assembling a modular automotive seat with an all-belts-to-seat-design.

    The design includes a seat belt terminal for a frame having a block supporting a seat belt in a seat housing with mechanical adjustment means supported by the housing for maintaining the block within a pair of opposed slots.

    "GM along with its vendors and subsidiaries design, manufacture, market and sell automobiles in the United States and throughout the world," the complaint states. "Plaintiff has analyzed seats from products produced by GM and marketed as component parts of GM products that utilize the same specific design components that are incorporated in the patented Mitchell technology."

    Among vehicles allegedly utilizing the patented technology include the Chevrolet Trailblazer, Cadillac Deville, GMC Yukon, Chevrolet Suburban, Chevrolet Silverado, GMC Sierra, GMC Envoy, GMC Tahoe and GMC Denali.

    The plaintiff seeks to recover damages for lost profits, reasonable royalties, unjust enrichment, benefits received by defendant as a result of the misappropriated technology and other damages.

    The suit alleges that the plaintiff's injury was caused by defendant's gross negligence, malice or actual fraud. In addition, the plaintiff alleges that the infringement was committed intentionally and with callous disregard to plaintiff's legitimate rights.

    W. Shawn Staples of the O'Quinn Law Firm in Houston is representing the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 2:08-cv-178-TJW

    April 29

  • Santech Industries Inc. vs. FJC Inc.

    Plaintiff Santech is a Texas corporation having a principal place of business in Fort Worth.

    Santech claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent No. 7,325,809 for a Seal Kit for Vehicle Air Conditioning System and Associated Methods issued Feb. 5, 2008. The '809 Patent was issued to plaintiff by assignment from Ron C. Brezina and Michael Deese, the original complaint states.

    The suit states that FJC is a company in the business of manufacturing and selling seal kits for vehicle air conditioning systems.

    "Upon information and belief, defendant's seal kits have directly, indirectly, contributorily, and/or by inducement, infringed claims of the '809 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents," the suit states.

    The plaintiff claims it informed FJC of the '809 Patent and of FJC's infringement.

    "Despite defendant's knowledge of the '809 Patent, defendant has willfully, deliberately and intentionally infringed claims of the '809 Patent," the plaintiff alleges.

    Santech is seeking injunctive relief, an accounting of lost profits and damages no less than reasonable royalty, treble damages for willful infringement, interest, costs, attorneys' fees and other just and equitable relief.

    Ross D. Kennedy of Bracewell & Giuliani LLP in Houston is attorney-in-charge for the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 2:08-cv-181-TJW-CE

    April 30

  • Nextcard LLC vs. LivePerson Inc.

    Plaintiff Nextcard is a Texas limited liability company based in Marshall. The plaintiff claims it owns the rights to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,718,313 and 7,346,576 for Integrating Live Chat Into an Online Credit Card Application.

    The suit alleges that LivePerson has infringed the Nextcard patents by making, using and selling its Timpani software products that when used by LivePerson's customers infringe the methods and systems claimed in the patents.

    "Nextcard is entitled to recover from Defendant the damages sustained by Nextcard as a result of Defendant's wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial," the suit states.

    The plaintiff is seeking adequate compensation, interest, costs, attorneys' fees, a permanent injunction and any further just and proper relief.

    Donald Puckett of The Ware Firm in Dallas is attorney-in-charge for the plaintiff, along with attorneys from Nelson Bumgardner Casto PC in Fort Worth and the Albritton Law Firm in Longview.

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

    Case No. 2:08-cv-184-TJW

  • More News