PATENT INFRINGEMENT CASES

Marshall Division

June 20

  • Achates Reference Publishing Inc. v. Symantec Corp. et al.

    Plaintiff Achates Reference Publishing Inc. is a Texas corporation with a place of business in McKinney.

    The defendants Symantec Corp., GlobalSCAPE Inc., Common Time Inc., Common Time Ltd., Native Instruments Software Synthesis GmbH, Native Instruments North America Inc., Stardock Systems Inc., Valve LLC, Electronic Arts Inc., Nero AG, Nero Inc., QuickOffice Inc. and SolarWinds Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,982,889 issued Nov. 9, 1999, for Method and Apparatus for Distributing Information Products; and U.S. Patent No. 6,173,403 issued Jan. 9, 2001, for Method and Apparatus for Distributing Information Products.

    The plaintiff is asking the Court to issue an injunction preventing further infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages and attorney's fees.

    Achates Reference Publishing is represented by S. Calvin Capshaw and Elizabeth L. DeRieux of Capshaw DeRieux in Gladewater and Robert M. Parker, Robert Christopher Bunt and Charles Ainsworth of Parker, Bunt & Ainsworth in Tyler.

    A jury trial is requested.

    Case No. 2:11-cv-00294

    June 24

  • RMail Limited et al v. Docusign Inc.
  • RMail Limited et al v. Right Signature LLC et al.

    The plaintiffs are RMail Limited, RPost Communications Limited, and RPost Holdings, Inc.

    The defendants are Docusign Inc., Right Signature, Farmers Group Inc., and Farmers Insurance Co. Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on:

    U.S. Patent No. 6,182,219 issued Jan. 30, 2001, and U.S. Patent No. 6,571,334 for Apparatus and Method for Authenticating the Dispatch and Contents of Documents;
    U.S. Patent No. 7,707,624 issued April 27, 2010, for System for, and Method of, Proving the Transmission, Receipt, and Content of a Reply to an Electronic Message; and
    U.S. Patent No. 7,966,372 issued June 21, 2011, for System and Method for Verifying Delivery and Integrity of Electronic Messages.

    The defendants are accused of willful infringement, willful use of false designations of origin, false descriptions and representations in violation of the U.S. Trademark Act, trademark dilution, violation of the U.S. Trademark Act, common law trademark infringement and dilution, unfair competition and damage to business reputation.

    The plaintiffs are asking for the Court for an order enjoining the defendants from using similar trademarks and for an award of damages, costs, expenses, interest, enhanced damages and attorneys' fees.

    The plaintiffs are represented by Winston O. Huff of Huff Legal Group in Plano and Lewis E. Hudnell III of Hudell Law Group in New York, N.Y.

    A jury trial is requested.

    Case No. 2:11-cv-00299 and 2:11-cv-00300

    Tyler Division

    June 21

  • Teleconnect Solutions v. Cisco Systems Inc.

    Plaintiff Teleconnect Solutions is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Frisco, Texas.

    The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,802,160 issued Sept. 1, 1998, for Multi-Ring Telephone Method and System.

    Teleconnect is seeking an award of damages, interest, attorney's fees and court costs.

    The plaintiff is represented by Matthew J.M. Prebeg, Christopher M. Faucett and Stephen W. Abbott of Clearman Prebeg in Houston; and T. John Ward Jr. and Wesley Hill of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview.

    A jury trial is requested.

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

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00321

    June 21

  • Landmark Technology v. Body Central Corp. et al

    Plaintiff Landmark Technology LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Tyler.

    The defendants are Body Central Corp., Casual Male Retail Group Inc., Christopher & Banks Inc., Vitamin Shoppe Inc., Tween Brands Inc., Stein Mart Inc., Stage Stores Inc., Carter's Inc., The Buckle Inc. and GNC Holdings Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,576,951 issued Nov. 19, 1996, for Automated Sales and Services System and U.S. Patent No. 6,289,319 issued Sept. 11, 2001, for Automated Business and Financial Transaction Processing System; and U.S. Patent No. 7,010,508 issued March 7, 2006, for Automated Multimedia Data Processing Network.

    The plaintiffs are asking the Court for an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, reasonably royalty or lost profits, enhanced damages, court costs, attorney's fees and interest.

    Landmark Technology is represented by Charles Ainsworth and Robert Christopher Bunt of Parker, Bunt & Ainsworth P.C. in Tyler along with Stanley M. Gibson and Gregory S. Cordey of Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP of Los Angeles, Calif.

    A jury trial is requested.

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

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00322

    June 23

  • Kroy IP Holdings v. Loyaltyworks Inc. et al

    The defendants are Loyaltyworks Inc., Frosch International Travel Inc., ACI Worldwide Inc. and Capita Technologies Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,061,660 issued May 9, 2000, for System and Method For Incentive Programs and Award Fulfillment.

    Kroy IP Holdings is asking the Court to issue an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, costs, attorney's fees and enhanced damages.

    The plaintiff is represented by Hao Ni of Ni Law Firm in Dallas and John W. Olivo Jr. of Olivo Law Group PC in Chatham, N.J.

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00330

    June 24

  • Ceats Inc. v. Ticket Software et al.

    Ceats Inc. is a Nevada corporation with its principal place of business in Tyler.

    The defendants are Ticket Software L.L.C. and TicketNetwork Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,548,869 B2 on June 16, 2009, for System and Method for Selecting and Reserving Sets of Seats.

    Ceats is asking the Court to issue an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, enhanced damages, attorney's fees and interest.

    The plaintiff is represented by J. Thad Heartfield and M. Dru Montgomery of The Heartfield Law Firm in Beaumont.

    A jury trial is requested.

    Case No. 6:11-cv-00332

  • More News