TYLER DIVISION

Sept. 9 

NovelPoint Tracking LLC v Alpine Electronics of America Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00746

NovelPoint Tracking LLC v DeLorme Publishing Co. Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00747

NovelPoint Tracking LLC v Hertz Global Holdings Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00748

Plaintiff NovelPoint Tracking (NPT) is a Texas limited liability company based in Plano.

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

Allegedly infringing products include the Alpine INA-W910 In-Dash Navigation Receiver, the DeLorme Earthmate GPS PN-20 and the Hertz Neverlost V.

The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys’ fees and other relief the court deems just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

NPT is represented by Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler Law PC in Longview. Stamatios Stamoulis and Richard C. Weinblatt of Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC in Wilmington, Del., are of counsel.

Sept. 10

Core Wireless Licensing S.a.r.l. v Apple Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00751

Plaintiff Core Wireless is a corporation organized under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Core Wireless Licensing Ltd. is a Texas corporation with a principal place of business in Plano.

The patents-in-suit are:

U.S. Patent No. 8,713,476 issued April 29, 2014, for a Computing Device with Improved User Interface for Applications;

U.S. Patent No. 8,498,671 issued July 30, 2013, for a Mobile Telephone Device with User-Selectable Content Displayed and Updated During Idle Time;

U.S. Patent No. 8,434,020 issued April 30, 2013, for a Computing Device with Improved User Interface for Applications;

U.S. Patent No. 7,693,552 issued April 6, 2010, for a Text Messaging Device;

U.S. Patent No. 7,072,667 issued July 4, 2006, for Location Information Service for a Cellular Telecommunications Network; and

U.S. Patent No. 5,907,823 issued May 25, 1999, for a Method and Circuit Arrangement for Adjusting the Level or Dynamic Range of an Audio Signal.

Defendant Apple allegedly infringes the patents-in-suit by making, using and selling the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPhone 5S, iPad, iPad 2, third and fourth generation iPads, iPad mini, second generation iPad mini and iPad Air.

Plaintiff Core Wireless is seeking compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, costs, attorneys’ fees and other damages to which it may be entitled. A jury trial is requested.

The plaintiff is represented by T. John Ward Jr. and Wesley Hill of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview; Henry Bunsow and Brian A.E. Smith of Bunsow De Mory Smith & Allison LLP in San Francisco, Calif.; and Denise De Mory and Craig Y. Allison of Bunsow De Mory Smith & Allison LLP in Redwood City, Calif.

 

Core Wireless Licensing S.a.r.l. v Apple Inc. Case No. 6:14-cv-00752

Plaintiff Core Wireless is a corporation organized under the laws of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Core Wireless Licensing Ltd. is a Texas corporation with a principal place of business in Plano.

The patents-in-suit are:

U.S. Patent No. 5,946,634 issued Aug. 31, 1999, for Mobile Communications;

U.S. Patent No. 6,477,151 issued Nov. 5, 2002, for Packet Radio Telephone Services;

U.S. Patent No. 6,633,536 issued Oct. 14, 2003, for Signaling in a Digital Mobile Communications System;

U.S. Patent No. 7,782,818 issued Aug 24, 2010, for a System and Method for Providing a Connection in a Communication Network; and

U.S. Patent No. RE44,828 E for a Method and Arrangement for Choosing a Channel Coding and Interleaving Scheme for Certain Types of Packet Data Connections. The ‘828 Patent was issued April 8, 2014, and is a reissue of U.S. Patent No. 7,773,708 originally issued Aug. 10, 2010.

According to the complaint, the patents-in-suit are among more than 1,200 Standard-Essential Patents owned by Core Wireless. Core Wireless became the owner of the Standard-Essential Patents from original owner Nokia Corp. on Sept. 1, 2011.

The patents-in-suit were originally invented by, procured by, or assigned to Nokia, which is and has been a member of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”), a non-profit Standard Setting Organization headquartered in France.

ETSI is and has been involved in standardization of the most recent generations of mobile communications standards, including Global System for Mobile (“GSM”) also known as 2G, GSM improvements known as GSM Packet Radio Service (“GPRS”) and Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution, the third generation of GSM technology known as Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (“UMTS”) or 3G, and Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) known as 4G, which is anticipated to become the first global mobile communications standard.

Nokia declared before ETSI that the patents-in-suit are essential to one or more of the mobile communications standards developed or completed by ETSI including without limitation the GSM/GPRS, UMTS, and LTE standards. As a result, pursuant to ETSI’s Intellectual Property Rights (“IPR”) Policy, Nokia had an obligation to license the patents-in-suit on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms.

Apple implements the GSM/GPRS, UMTS, and/or the LTE standards in certain of its wireless mobile communications devices, including, without limitation, Apple’s iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, iPhone 5S, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPad, iPad 2, third and fourth generation iPads, iPad Mini, second generation iPad Mini, and iPad Air (“Apple Standard-Compliant Products”) that infringe one or more of the patent claims involved in this action.

Plaintiff Core Wireless is seeking compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, costs, attorneys’ fees and other damages to which it may be entitled. A jury trial is requested.

The plaintiff is represented by T. John Ward Jr. and Wesley Hill of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview; Henry Bunsow and Brian A.E. Smith of Bunsow De Mory Smith & Allison LLP in San Francisco, Calif.; and Denise De Mory and Craig Y. Allison of Bunsow De Mory Smith & Allison LLP in Redwood City, Calif.

 

Sept. 15

Cellular Communications Equipment LLC v Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al Case No. 6:14-cv-00759

Plaintiff Cellular Communications Equipment is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Plano.

The defendants named in the suit are Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics America Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America LLC, AT&T Inc.; AT&T Mobility LLC, Verizon Communications Inc., Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless, Sprint Corp., Sprint Solutions Inc., Sprint Spectrum LP, Boost Mobile LLC, T-Mobile USA Inc. and T-Mobile US Inc.

The patents at issue in the suit are:

U.S. Patent No. 6,819,923 for a Method of Communication of Neighbor Cell Information;

U.S. Patent No. 8,055,820 for an Apparatus, System and Method for Designing a Buffer Status Reporting Format Based on Detected Pre-Selected Buffer Conditions;

U.S. Patent No. 6,810,019 for Reducing Interference in Inter-Frequency Measurement;

U.S. Patent No. 7,218,923 for Control of Terminal Applications in a Network Environment; and

U.S. Patent No. 7,941,174 for a Method for Multicode Transmission by a Subscriber Station.

CCE is seeking compensatory damages and a reasonable royalty, treble damages for willful infringement, interest and other relief the court deems just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Edward R. Nelson III of Nelson Bumgardner Casto PC in Fort Worth is lead attorney for the plaintiff with T. John Ward Jr. and J. Wesley Hill of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview.

More News