PATENT INFRINGEMENT CASES

Beaumont Division

Jan. 3

  • Coach Inc. and Coach Services Inc. v. Cowboy Quick Stop 10 and Mohammad S. Gadit

    Plaintiff Coach is a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business in New York, N.Y. Plaintiff Coach Services Inc. is a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business in Jacksonville, Fla.

    The defendants are accused of trademark and trade dress infringement, counterfeiting, false designation of origin and false advertising, and trademark dilution under the Lanham Act, injury to business reputation and trademark dilution, trademark infringement, unfair competition and unjust enrichment.

    Coach is asking the Court to issue an injunction to prevent the defendants' from continued acts of infringement and for an award of statutory damages of $2,000,000 per counterfeit mark or for an award of all profits derived from the infringing products, plus actual damages, treble damages, costs, attorney's fees, investigatory fees and interest.

    Coach is represented by Natalie L. Arbaugh of Fish & Richardson in Dallas.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00001

    Marshall Division

    Jan. 3

  • Applica Consumer Products Inc. v. Lucky Litter

    Applica is a Florida corporation having a principal place of business in Miramar, Fla. Applica markets products under the names Black & Decker and company owned brand names like Littermaid and Scoopmaid.

    Prior to the lawsuit, the defendant Lucky Litter had sent Applica a cease and desist letter regarding U.S. Patent No. 7,762,213.

    The plaintiff is asking the Court to issue a judgment that it does not infringe on the '213 patent and to declare that the patent is invalid.

    The plaintiff is also asking for an award of attorneys' fees, costs and expenses.

    Applica is represented by Elizabeth DeRieux, Bruce W. Slayden, Jeffrey D. Mills and Brian C. Banner of King & Spalding in Austin and S. Calvin Capshaw III and Elizabeth L. DeRieux of Capshaw DeRieux in Longview.

    Jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge T. John Ward is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 2:11-cv-0002

    Tyler Division

    Jan. 5

  • Advanced Display Technologies of Texas v. Optronics Corp. et al.

    Advanced Display Technologies is a Texas limited liability company.

    The defendants are AU Optronics Corp., AU Optronics Corp. America, Apple Inc., ASUS Computer International, ASUSTek Computer Inc., Haier America Trading, Haier Group Corp., Research in Motion Corp., Research in Motion Limited, Sharp Corp., Sharp Electronics Corp.,ViewSonic Corp. and Vizio Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent Nos. 5,739,931 issued April 14, 1998, for Illumination System Employing an Array of Microprisms and U.S. Patent No. 6,261,664 issued July 17, 2001, for Optical Structures for Diffusing Light.

    The plaintiff is asking the Court to issue an injunction preventing further infringement of the '931 patent and the '664 patent.

    Advanced Display is also seeking an award of compensatory damages, court costs, interest and attorney's fees.

    The plaintiff is represented by Gregory S. Dovel and John Jeffrey Eichmann of Dovel & Luner in Santa Monica, Calif.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00011

    Jan. 7

  • Eon Corp. IP Holdings v. Skyguard, et al.

    EON is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Tyler.
    The defendants are Skyguard, Cantaloupe Systems Inc., Space Data Corp., MedApps Inc., MEI Inc. and Novatel Wireless Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on the following:

  • U.S. Patent No. 5,388,101 issued Feb. 7, 1995, for Interactive Nationwide Data Service Communication System for Stationary and Mobile Battery Operated Subscriber Units;

  • U.S. Patent No. 5,481,546 issued Jan. 2, 1996, for Interactive Nationwide Data Service Communication System for Stationary and Mobile Battery Operated Subscriber Units; and

  • U.S. Patent No. 5,592,491 issued Jan. 7, 1997, for Wireless Modem.

    The infringing products are related to two-way communication networks, associated services or data systems.

    EON is asking the Court to issue a permanent injunction preventing the defendants from continued acts of infringement and for an award damages, enhanced damages, interest, costs and attorney's fees.

    The plaintiff is represented by Daniel R. Scardino, Jeffery R. Johnson and Cabrach J. Connor of Reed & Scardino in Austin and Deron Dacus of Ramey & Flock in Tyler.

    Jury trial is requested.

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00015

  • More News