Recent patent infringement cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas

Marshall Division

May 21 

• Penovia LLC v. Brother International Corp. Case No. 2:13-cv-00420

• Penovia LLC v. Canon U.S.A. Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00421

• Penovia LLC v. Epson America Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00422

• Penovia LLC v. Lexmark International Case No. 2:13-cv-00423

• Penovia LLC v. Oki Data Americas Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00424

• Penovia LLC v. Richoh USA Inc. Case No. 2:13-cv-00425

• Penovia LLC v. Samsung Case No. 2:13-cv-00426

• Penovia LLC v. Xerox Corp. Case No. 2:13-cv-00427

• Penovia LLC v. Zebra Technologies Corp. Case No. 2:13-cv-00428

Penovia is a Texas limited liability company with a principal office location in Allen.

The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,822,221 issued Nov. 8, 2010, issued for Office Machine Monitoring Device.

The plaintiff is asking for an award of damages, interest and court costs.

Penovia is represented by Craig Tadlock and Keith Smiley of Tadlock Law Firm PLLC in Plano. A jury trial is requested.

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

 

Tyler Division

May 22

• Landmark Technology v. iRobot Corp. Case No. 6:13-cv-00411

• Landmark Technology v. Tempur-Pedic International Inc. Case No. 6:13-cv-00413

• Landmark Technology v. Vitacost.com Inc. Case No. 6:13-cv-00414

• Landmark Technology v. World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. Case No. 6:13-cv-00416

• Landmark Technology v. Build-A-Bear Workshop Inc. Case No. 6:13-cv-00417

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

The defendant is 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. 7,010,508 issued March 7, 2006, for Automated Multimedia Data Processing Network.

The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, reasonable 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 and Stanley M. Gibson of Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP of Los Angeles, Calif.  A jury trial is requested

U.S. District Judge Michael H. Schneider is assigned to the cases.

 

• Cheetah Omni LLC v. NP Photonics Inc. Case No. 6:13-cv-00418

Cheetah Omni is a Texas limited liability company.

The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,633,673 issued Dec. 15, 2009, for System And Method For Generating Infrared Light For Use In Medical Procedures; and U.S. Patent No. 7,433,116 issued Oct. 7, 2008, for Infra-Red Light Source Including a Raman Shifter.

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

Cheetah Omni is represented by Winston O. Huff and Deborah Jagai of W. O. Huff & Associates PLLC in Dallas. A jury trial is requested.

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

 

May 23

• Mirror Worlds Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc. et al Case No. 6:13-cv-00419

Plaintiff Mirror Worlds Technologies is a Texas limited liability company with principal place of business in Tyler.

The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 6,006,227 issued Dec. 21, 1999, for Document Stream Operating System.

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

Mirror Worlds is represented by Simon Franzini, Sean A. Luner, and Gregory S. Dovel of Dovel & Luner LLP in Santa Monica, Calif. A jury trial is requested.

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