Recent patent infringement cases filed in the Eastern District of Texas

BEAUMONT DIVISION

Oct. 1 

• Affinity Labs of Texas LLC v Robert Bosch LLC Case No. 1:14-cv-00499

Plaintiff Affinity Labs is a Texas limited liability company located in Dripping Springs.

According to the complaint, Affinity Labs was founded in 2008 by Russell White and Harlie Frost. White is an entrepreneur and patent attorney from Houston with a mechanical engineering degree from Texas A&M University and law degree from University of Temple Law School. After earning his law degree, White co-founded SBC Knowledge Ventures, an entity within AT&T, the suit states. He is listed as inventor on at least 32 separate U.S. patents.

In March 2000, White and Kevin R. Imes applied for US Patent No. 9,537,812, which addressed the problem of accessing, managing and communicating digital audio and video content.

“In doing so, the ‘812 application disclosed a number of inventions relating to creating a new media ecosystem with a portable electronic audio device such as a smart phone at its center,” the suit states.

“The ‘812 application also disclosed the ability to download music and playlists from an online store or stream Internet radio to the portable electronic device then connect the device to a second device such as an automobile with a display.”

According to the suit, the disclosures in the ‘812 application were made “more than a year before the iPod was released in October 2001, three years before iTunes Store sold its first song, seven years before the first iPhone was sold, eight years before the App Store was launched and eight years before the functionality of having the music available on a portable device be displayed and selected using controls on an automobile stereo system and played through the speakers was available using an iPhone and some luxury vehicles.”

On Jan. 29, 2008, the PTO issued U.S. Patent No. 7,324,833 for a System and Method for Connecting a Portable Audio Player to an Automobile Sound System. The ‘833 Patent was issued from a continuation application claiming priority to the ‘812 application.

In a 2010 decision, an East Texas jury awarded Affinity Labs $12,986,530 in an infringement trial against Hyundai, Kia and Volkswagen.

In the current suit, Affinity accuses Bosch of infringing the ‘833 Patent by selling its Integrated Head Unit technology like the LCN2 technology used within the 2015 Nissan XTERRA. Affinity Labs claims Bosch has had knowledge of the ‘833 Patent since at least Jan. 15, 2014.

Affinity Labs is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, interest, treble damages for willful infringement, attorneys’ fees, costs and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Lawrence L. Germer and Charles Goehringer Jr. of Germer PLLC in Beaumont and Ronald Schutz, Cyrus Morton, Daniel Burgess, Shira Shapiro and Kristine TIetz of Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP in Minneapolis, Minn., are representing the plaintiff.

The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Ron Clark.

 

MARSHALL DIVISION

Sept. 29

• DataTech IP LLC v Acer Inc. and Acer America Corp. Case No. 2:14-cv-00914

• DataTech IP LLC v Williamson-Dickie Manufacturing Co. Case No. 2:14-cv-00915

• DataTech IP LLC v Golfsmith International Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00916

• DataTech IP LLC v Olympus Imaging America Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00917

Plaintiff DataTech is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business in Plano.

Defendants are accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,895,554 issued May 17, 2005, for a Method of Document Assembly.

Defendants allegedly infringe the ‘554 Patent through computer implemented systems for assembling an electronic document to open or initialize a document having at least one live data field where customers are instructed to provide their billing and/or shipping information.

DataTech is seeking compensatory damages, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys’ fees and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

The plaintiff is represented by Andrew W. Spangler of Spangler Law PC in Longview and Matt Olavi of Olavi Dunne LLP in Los Angeles, Calif.

 

Sept. 30

• Eclipse IP LLC v Express Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00920

• Eclipse IP LLC v Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00921

• Eclipse IP LLC v Partsbandit.com LLC Case No. 2:14-cv-00922

Plaintiff Eclipse IP is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business in Boynton Beach, Fla.

Defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,479,899 issued Jan. 20, 2009, for Notification Systems and Methods Enabling a Response to Cause Connection Between a Notified PCD and a Delivery or Pickup Representative.

Defendants allegedly infringe the ‘899 Patent through making, using or selling computer-based notification systems and methods to, for example, monitor travel data in connection with orders placed via defendants’ websites; initiate notifications to customers and enable such customers to select whether or not to communicate with defendants.

Eclipse IP also alleges that defendants had knowledge of their infringing behavior at least since receiving a letter from Eclipse on July 1, 2014.

The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages, costs, interest, treble damages for willful infringement, attorneys’ fees and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Craig Tadlock and Keith Smiley of Tadlock Law Firm PLLC in Plano and Matt Olavi and Brian Dunne of Olavi Dunne LLP in Los Angeles, Calif., are representing the plaintiff.

 

Oct. 1

• National Cheng Kung University v Freescale Semiconductor Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00924

• National Cheng Kung University v STMicroelectronics Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00925

Plaintiff National Cheng Kung University is an institute of higher education in Taiwan.

The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 7,154,422 issued Dec. 26, 2006, for a Scheme and Method for Testing Analog-to-Digital Converters.

Defendant Freescale is allegedly infringing the ‘422 Patent by making, using or selling microcontrollers including MPC5675K Microcontroller.

The University is seeking compensatory damages, costs, expenses, interest, injunctive relief and any other relief to which it may be entitled.

National Cheng Kung University is represented by Carl Roth and Amanda Abraham of The Roth Law Firm PC in Marshall and Michael Roberts, Debra Josephson and Stephanie Smith of Roberts Law Firm PA in Little Rock, Ark.

 

• Bright Response LLC v Infosys Ltd. Case No. 2:14-cv-00927

• Bright Response LLC v Nice Systems Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00928

Plaintiff Bright Response is a Texas limited liability company located in Plano.

Defendants are accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,278,996 issued Aug. 21, 2001, for a System and Method for Message Process and Response.

Defendants’ allegedly infringing products include the HMI Voice of Customer Analytics that recognize and answer emails based on the writer’s intent in unconstrained natural language text emails.

Bright Response is seeking compensatory damages, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys’ fees and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Andrew Spangler of Spangler Law PC in Longview and Stamatios Stamoulis and Richard Weinblatt of Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC in Wilmington, Del., are representing the plaintiff.

 

• Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v Qualcomm Inc. and Qualcomm Technologies Inc. Case No. 2:14-cv-00930

Plaintiff Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture (PUMA) is a Texas limited liability company based in Plano.

U.S. Patent No. 5,812,789 issued Sept. 22, 1998, for a Video and/or Audio Decompression and/or Compression Device that Shares a Memory Interface;

U.S. Patent No. 5,960,464 issued Sept. 28, 1999, for Memory Sharing Architecture for a Decoding in a Computer System;

U.S. Patent No. 6,058,459 issued May 2, 2000, for a Video/Audio Decompression/Compression Device Including an Arbiter and Method for Accessing a Shared Memory;

U.S. Patent No. 6,427,194 issued July 30, 2002, for an Electronic System and Method for Display Using a Decoder and Arbiter to Selectively Allow Access to a Shared Memory;

U.S. Patent No. 7,321,368 issued Jan. 22, 2008, for an Electronic System and Method for Display Using a Decoder and Arbiter to Selectively Allow Access to a Shared Memory;

U.S. Patent No. 7,452,045 issued June 2, 2009, for an Electronic System and Method for Display Using a Decoder and Arbiter to Selectively Allow Access to a Shared Memory;

U.S. Patent No. 7,777,753 issued Aug. 17, 2010, for an Electronic System and Method for Selectively Allowing Access to a Shared Memory;

U.S. Patent No. 8,054,315 issued Nov. 8, 2011, for an Electronic System and Method for Selectively Allowing Access to a Shared Memory; and

U.S. Patent No. 8,681,164 issued March 25, 2014, for an Electronic System and Method for Selectively Allowing Access to a Shared Memory.

Defendant Qualcomm’s allegedly infringing products include the Snapdragon family of System-on-chips including the S1, S2, S3, S4, 200, 400, 600 and 800 series.

PUMA is seeking a permanent injunction against Samsung, compensatory damages, enhanced damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

Demetrios Anaipakos of Ahmad Savistanos Anaipakos Alavi & Mensing PC in Houston is representing the plaintiff.

 

Oct. 3

• Autoloxer LLC v Ford Motor Co. Case No. 2:14-cv-00931

Plaintiff Autoloxer is a Texas limited liability company based in McKinney.

Defendant Ford Motor Co. is accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,084,735 issued Aug. 1, 2006, for a Remote Vehicle Security System.

The ‘735 Patent has been cited as prior art during the prosecution history of subsequently-issued United States patents, including patents assigned to Polaris Industries Inc. and Caterpillar Inc., according to the suit.

Ford infringes the ‘735 Patent by using and selling vehicles with the MyKey system.

Autoloxer is seeking compensatory damages no less than a reasonable royalty, interest, costs, injunctive relief and other relief deemed just and proper. A jury trial is demanded.

David R. Bennett of Direction IP Law in Chicago, Ill., is representing the plaintiff.