Beaumont Division

Dec. 6 

• Affinity Labs of Texas v. Ford Motor Co.  Case No. 1:12-cv-00580

• Affinity Labs of Texas v. General Motors Co. et al Case No. 1:12-cv-00582

Affinity Labs of Texas is a Texas limited liability corporation having offices in Austin.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,324,833 issued Jan. 29, 2008, for System and Method for Connecting a Portable Audio Player to an Automobile Sound System; U.S. Patent No. 7,634,228 issued Dec. 15, 2009, for Content Delivery System and Method; and U.S. Patent No. 7,953,390 issued May 31, 2011, for Method for Content Delivery.

The plaintiff is asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages, attorney’s fees and court costs.

Affinity Labs is represented by Lawrence Louis Germer and Charles W. Goehringer Jr. of Germer Gertz LLP in Beaumont and Ronald J. Schutz, Cyrus A. Morton, Daniel R. Burgess, Shira T. Shapiro and Kristine Weir of Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP in Minneapolis, Minn.

A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Ron Clark is assigned to the cases.

 

Marshall Division

Dec. 2

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Kyocera Communications Inc.  Case No. 2:12-cv-00741

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00742

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Dell Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00743

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Lenovo (United States) Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00744

Dec. 3

• NovelPoint Tracking v. LG Electronic USA Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00746

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Samsung Electronics America Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00747

Dec. 4

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Huawei Device USA Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00753

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00756

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Coolpad Technologies Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00757

Dec. 8

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Toshiba America Information Systems Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00780

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Acer America Corp. Case No. 2:12-cv-00781

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Pantech Wireless Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00782

• NovelPoint Tracking v. Personal Communications Devices Case No. 2:12-cv-00783

NovelPoint Tracking LLC is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Allen.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,442,485 issued Aug. 27, 2002, for Method and Apparatus for an Automatic Vehicle Location, Collision Notification and Synthetic Voice.

The plaintiff is asking the court to enjoin the defendants from further infringement and for an award of damages, enhanced damages, attorney’s fees, interest and court costs.

NovelPoint Tracking is represented by Dallas attorneys Everett Upshaw and Rhiannon Kelso. A jury trial is requested.

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

 

Dec. 4

• Lodsys Group v. MakeMyTrip.com Inc. et al Case No. 2:12-cv-00749

• Lodsys Group v. Burberry Limited et al Case No. 2:12-cv-00750

Lodsys is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Marshall.

The defendants are accused of willful infringement.

The patents at issue include U.S. Patent 7,620,565 issued Nov. 17, 2009, for Customer –Based Product Design Module and U.S. Patent No. 7,222,078 issued May 22, 2007, for Methods and Systems for Gathering Information from Units of a Commodity Across a Network.

Lodsys is asking the court to issue an injunction preventing the defendants from further acts of infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages, attorney’s fees and court costs.

The plaintiff is represented by William E. Davis III of the Davis Law Firm in Longview and Michael A. Goldfarb and Christopher M. Huck of Kelley, Donion, Gill, Huck & Goldfarb in Seattle. A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the cases.

 

• Qexez v. Keynote Systems Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00751

• Qexez v. Radcom Equpment Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00752

• Qexez v. Tektronix Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00754

Qexez is a limited liability company with its principal place of business in Longview.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,596,373 issued Sept. 29, 2009, issued Method and System For Quality of Service (QOS) Monitoring For Wireless Devices.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, interest, attorney’s fees and court costs.

Qexez is represented by Andrew Spangler of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Longview and James A. Fussell III of Spangler & Fussell P.C. in Alexandria, Va. Jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the case.

 

Dec. 7

• Variant Holdings and Variant Inc. v. Ashton Hotel Partners d/b/a The Ashton Hotel Case No. 2:12-cv-00763

• Variant Holdings and Variant Inc. v. Hale-Blackwell Ltd. d/b/a Hotel Allandale Case No. 2:12-cv-00763

• Variant Holdings and Variant Inc. v. The Mian Development Corp. d/b/a Sterling Hotel Dallas Case No. 2:12-cv-00765

• Variant Holdings and Variant Inc. v. Live Oak Lodging Inc., Heritage Hotels Rockport d/b/a The Lighthouse Inn at Aransas Bay and Heritage Hotels Fredricksburg d/b/a Inn on Barons Creek Case No. 2:12-cv-00767

• Variant Holdings and Variant Inc. v. Moody Gardens Inc. d/b/a Moody Gardens Hotel, Spa and Convention Center Case No. 2:12-cv-00769

Variant Holdings is a limited liability company with a place of business in Charlestown and Variant Holdings Inc. has a place of business in McFarland, Wis.

The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,624,044 issued on Nov.24, 2009, for System for Marketing Goods and Services Utilizing Computerized Central and Remote Facilities.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue an injunction and for an award of damages, costs, expenses, interest and attorney’s fees.

Variant Holdings is represented by John J. Edmonds, Stephen F. Schlather and Joshua B. Long of Collins, Edmonds & Pogorzelski in Houston and Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler Law P.C. in Longview.

A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the case.

Case No. 2:12-cv-00623

 

Dec. 7

• DietGoal Innovations v. Kellan Restaurant Management Corp. d/b/a 54th Street Grill & Bar Case No. 2:12-cv-00761

• DietGoal Innovations v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00764

• DietGoal Innovations v. Einstein Noah Restaurant Group Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00766

• DietGoal Innovations v. Freshii Case No. 2:12-cv-00768

• DietGoal Innovations v. Marco’s Franchising Case No. 2:12-cv-00770

• DietGoal Innovations v. Potbelly Sandwich Works Case No. 2:12-cv-00771

• DietGoal Innovations v. CBC Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Corner Bakery Corp. Case No. 2:12-cv-00772

• DietGoal Innovations v. Deli Managements Inc. d/b/a Jason’s Deli Case No. 2:12-cv-00773

• DietGoal Innovations v. Pita Pit USA Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00774

• DietGoal Innovations v. Taco John’s International Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00775

• DietGoal Innovations v. Ufood Restaurant Group Inc. Case No. 2:12-cv-00776

• DietGoal Innovations v. Genghis Grill Franchise Concepts Case No. 2:12-cv-00777

• DietGoal Innovations v. Biglari Holdings Inc. et al Case No. 2:12-cv-00778

• DIetGoal Innovations v. Tropical Smoothie Café Case No. 2:12-cv-00779

DietGoal Innovations is a Texas limited liability company based in Austin.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,585,516 issued July 1, 2003, for Method and System for Computerized Visual Behavior Analysis, Training and Planning.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an award of damages, interest, attorney’s fees and court costs.

DietGoal is represented by Christopher M. Joe, Eric W. Buether, Brian A. Carpenter, Mark D. Perantie, Niky Bukovcan and Monica Tavakoli of Buether Joe & Carpenter in Dallas. Jury trials are requested.

 

Tyler Division

Dec. 4

• MacroSolve Inc. v. Bed Bath & Beyond Case No. 6:12-cv-00915

• MacroSolve Inc. v. Sears Holdings Management Corp. et al Case No. 6:12-cv-00916

• MacroSolve Inc. v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. Case No. 6:12-cv-00917

MacroSolve is an Oklahoma corporation with a principal place of business in Tulsa, Okla.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,822,816 issued for Oct. 26, 2010, for System and Method for Data Management.

The plaintiff is asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, interest, court costs and attorney’s fees.

MacroSolve is represented by Matthew J. Antonelli, Zachariah S. Harrington, Larry D. Thompson Jr. and Kris Y. Teng of Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson in Houston. A jury trial is requested.

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

 

Dec. 6

• Wi-Lan Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al Case No. 6:12-cv-00920

• Wi-Lan Inc. v. Sierra Wireless America Inc. Case No. 6:12-cv-00921

Wi-LAN is a Canadian corporation with its principal place of business in Ottawa, Ontario.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. RE37,802 issued July 23, 2002, for Multicode Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum and U.S. Patent No. 5,282,222 issued Jan. 25, 1994, for Method and Apparatus for Multiple Access Between Transceivers in Wireless Communications Using OFDM Spread Spectrum.

The plaintiff is asking the court to issue an injunction preventing the defendants from further acts of infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages and interest.

Wi-Lan is represented by Sam Baxter of McKool Smith in Marshall; Robert A. Cote, John F. Petrsoric and Kevin Schubert of McKool Smith P.C. in New York, N.Y.; Seth Hasenour in McKool Smith P.C. in Austin; and Dirk D. Thomas of McKool Smith P.C. in Washington, D.C. A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis is assigned to the cases.

 

Dec. 7

• Marshall Feature Recognition v. J.C. Penney Co. Inc.

Marshall Feature Recognition is a limited liability company with a principal place of business in Marshall.

The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,886,750 issued May 3, 2005, for a Method and Apparatus for Accessing Electronic Data Via a Familiar Printed Medium.

Marshall Feature is asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, treble damages, interest, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The plaintiff is represented by Melissa Richards Smith of Gillam & Smith in Marshall and Thomas Maiorino of Maiorino Law Group in Mount Laurel, N.J. A jury trial is requested.

Case No. 6:12-cv-00925

 

Lufkin Division

Dec. 4

• Swipe Innovations v. NCR Corp. Case No. 9:12-cv-00205

Swipe is a limited liability company formed with a principal place of business in Houston.

The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,351,296 issued Sept. 27, 1994, for Financial Transmission System.

Swipe is asking the court for an injunction and for an award of damages, costs, interest and attorney’s fees.

The plaintiff is represented by Larry D. Thompson Jr., Matthew J. Antonelli and Zachariah S. Harrington of Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson in Houston and Stafford Davis of The Stafford Davis Firm in Tyler. Jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Ron Clark is assigned to the case.

More News