Freeny et al v. Bose Corporation 2:16-cv-00668-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. Creative Technology Ltd. et al 2:16-cv-00669-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. Fitbit, Inc. 2:16-cv-00670-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. Garmin International, Inc. 2:16-cv-00671-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. GoPro, Inc. 2:16-cv-00672-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. Harman International Industries, Incorporated 2:16-cv-00673-JRG-RSP
Freeny et al v. Aliphcom d/b/a Jawbone 2:16-cv-00674-JRG-RSP
The plaintiffs reside in Flower Mound, Fort Worth, and Spring, respectively.
The sons of the late inventor Charles C. Freeny, Jr., they have pursued legal action in response to what they assert is infringement of United States Patent Number 6,490,443.
Per court papers, the ‘443 patent, entitled “Communication and Proximity Authorization Systems,” was issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Dec. 3, 2002 and attributed to the complainants’ father.
“The ’443 patent describes, among other things, novel systems in which electronic devices can communicate wirelessly to provide and/or receive services from other electronic devices when they are within proximity of each other,” court documents say.
“These communications can occur over multiple communication signals and with the use of authorization codes.”
The Freeny siblings seek unspecified monetary damages and a jury trial.
Attorney Christopher D. Banys of the law firm Banys, P.C. in Palo Alto, Calif. serves as the plaintiffs’ lead counsel.
Encoditech LLC v. Under Armour, Inc. 6:16-cv-00924-RWS-JDL
Encoditech LLC v. LVMH Watch & Jewelry USA Inc. 6:16-cv-00925-RWS-JDL
Plano-based Encoditech is the plaintiff.
The company claims ownership of U.S. Patent No. 6,321,095 B1 entitled "Wireless Communications Approach." The ‘095 patent was issued on Nov. 21, 2001, per court documents.
It seeks unspecified monetary damages and a jury trial.
Attorneys Stamatios Stamoulis and Richard C. Weinblatt of the law firm Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC in Wilmington, Del. are representing the complainants.