Over the last five or more years, the Northern District has become the epicenter of intellectual property cases filed against an anonymous list of alleged infringers – often referred to as Doe defendants or Schedule A defendants – typically targeting online sellers of allegedly knock-off products. In fact, 83% of the Schedule A cases filed have been filed in Chicago since 2020. Those cases have made Chicago the busiest copyright district court for years running, and significantly increased the Northern District’s patent and trademark case filings as well. The cases started out as a trickle, until it became clear that the Northern District judges were largely allowing them. But more recently, Judge Kness has stayed proceedings in over 50 Schedule A cases. While it is just one judge on a large Northern District bench, it is enough to chill filings because plaintiffs know their complaints will be randomly assigned to a judge and, therefore, have an equal chance of being assigned to Judge Kness. A similar thing happened more than a decade ago when then Seventh Circuit Judge Posner was regularly sitting by designation in about one Northern District patent case per year and issued a few decisions requiring tying damages expert analysis to causation analysis that was arguably more than required by the Federal Circuit. After Judge Posner issued a few of those decisions, patent cases fell off substantially in Chicago.

What Are Schedule A Cases?

Schedule A litigation has been a primary weapon for intellectual property owners fighting online counterfeiting for more than 15 years. These cases typically involve a single plaintiff filing suit against numerous (often dozens or hundreds) of online sellers simultaneously. The defendants are not identified in public pleadings but rather in sealed “Schedule A” attachments, purportedly to prevent alleged infringers from disappearing with ill-gotten gains.

A hallmark of these cases is an ex parte temporary restraining order and / or preliminary injunction that freezes defendants’ online accounts—often without their knowledge or opportunity to respond. While this approach has been embraced by brands seeking efficient enforcement mechanisms, it has increasingly raised due process concerns among judges.

Stay Order from Judge Kness

Judge Kness’s stay order, implemented since at least late March, explicitly states his intention “to reassess [the court’s] previous approach in Schedule A litigation involving Lanham Act, Copyright Act, and Patent Act claims typically brought on an ex parte basis.” This pause potentially impacts dozens of cases where plaintiffs have moved for temporary restraining orders. In my experience it is exceptionally rare to have a judge stay all of a category of cases before him.

Judge Kness is reassessing several fundamental aspects of Schedule A litigation, including:

  • Whether ex parte proceedings are appropriate;
  • If granting TROs without defendant participation is a sound exercise of the Court’s discretion;
  • The propriety of mass joinder of numerous defendants in single cases; and
  • What portion of the cases, if any, should be sealed.

And Judge Kness is not the only Northern District judge that has voiced some level of doubt about the Schedule A cases. In January 2025, Judge Durkin publicly welcomed guidance from the Seventh Circuit on handling Schedule A cases. In November 2024, Judge Daniel rejected a plaintiff’s attempt to join 103 defendants in a single suit.

On the other hand, Chief Judge Kendall recently reversed her own decision denying a preliminary injunction in a Schedule A case, finding that refusing to join multiple defendants would result in “a series of multiplying cases” and create an undue burden on the court’s docket.

The Migration Begins

With Judge Kness’s stay order explicitly noting that plaintiffs were free to pursue their cases elsewhere, many brand owners are already refiling their complaints outside Chicago. Nike and Universal Studios voluntarily dismissed their lawsuits from Judge Kness’s docket within days of his stay orders.

What’s Next?

The fundamental tension in Schedule A litigation remains unresolved: intellectual property owners seek efficient mechanisms to combat widespread online counterfeiting, while courts must ensure due process and proper application of procedural rules.

As Judge Kness completes his reassessment, the resulting guidance may significantly reshape how, or at least where, brand owners pursue online counterfeiters. Whether his approach becomes a model for other Northern District judges will likely determine if Chicago maintains its status as the primary venue for Schedule A litigation or if those cases migrate to other jurisdictions.

NPEs entered 2025 continuing their Q4 wave of filings with many entities filing actions for each of the last three months. Frequent filers included AML IP, Cedar Lane Technologies, Consolidated Transaction Processing, Context Direction, DataCloud Technologies, EasyWeb Innovations, K.Mizra, Linfo IP, Nearby Systems, Patent Armory, QR Switch, Quantion, Random Chat, Secure Matrix, Valtrus Innovations, and Virtual Creative Artists.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

AML IP LLC v. KURU Footwear, Inc. (D. Utah, W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr.

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • 7-Eleven, Inc.
  • KURU Footwear, Inc.

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            7,177,838 (Method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens)

Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Alterna Securities, Inc. (W.D. Tex., E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Alterna Securities, Inc.
  • ASUSTeK Computer, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patents:          8,577,782 (Trading with conditional offers for semi-anonymous participants); 10,346,105 (Method and system for communicating between a remote printer and a server); 6,516,147 (Scene recognition method and system using brightness and ranging mapping)

Consolidated Transaction Processing LLC v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).      

Judge:             District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company 
  • Genuine Parts Company
  • Hibbett Retail, Inc. f/k/a Hibbett Sporting Goods, Inc. 
  • Northern Tool & Equipment Company, Inc. 
  • Tractor Supply Company

Plaintiff:         Consolidated Transaction Processing LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Shea Beaty

Patents:          8,396,743 (Sending targeted product offerings based on personal information); 8,712,846 (Sending targeted product offerings based on personal information)

Context Direction LLC v. Huffines Chevrolet Lewisville, Inc. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Huffines Chevrolet Lewisville, Inc. d/b/a Huffines Chevrolet
  • Huffines Dodge Plano GP, Inc.
  • Huffines G Plano, Inc.
  • Huffines H McKinney, LP
  • Huffines H Plano, Inc.
  • Huffines K McKinney, (GP), LLC

Plaintiff:         Context Direction LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Direction IP Law

Patents:          10,142,791 (Method and system for context awareness of a mobile device); 11,057,738 (Adaptive context detection in mobile devices); 9,807,564 (Method for detecting context of a mobile device and a mobile device with a context detection module)

DataCloud Technologies, LLC v. Walgreen Co. (N.D. Ill., D. Del., E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge John F. Kness; District Judge Georgia N. Alexakis

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Walgreen Co. d/b/a Walgreens
  • Etsy, Inc.
  • Euromarket Designs, Inc. d/b/a Crate & Barrel
  • Designer Brands Inc.

Plaintiff:         DataCloud Technologies, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Stamoulis & Weinblatt; Rozier Hardt McDonough

Patents:          6,560,613 (Disambiguating file descriptors); 6,651,063 (Data organization and management system and method); 7,209,959 (Apparatus, system, and method for communicating to a network through a virtual domain providing anonymity to a client communicating on the network)

EasyWeb Innovations LLC v. BuiltWith Pty Ltd (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • BuiltWith Pty Ltd 
  • ContactOffice Group 
  • PocketSmith Ltd. 

Plaintiff:         EasyWeb Innovations, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Hecht Partners

Patent:            10,114,905 (Individual user selectable multi-level authorization method for accessing a computer system)

K.Mizra LLC v. Epson America, Inc. et al (C.D. Cal.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Epson America, Inc.
  • Seiko Epson Corporation

Plaintiff:         K.Mizra LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Payne & Fears; Sheridan Ross

Patents:          10,018,938 (Network system comprising customer replaceable unit); 7,570,400 (Document reading device); 9,769,342 (Electric apparatus)

Linfo IP LLC v. Air Oasis LLC (N.D. Tex., W.D. Tex., M.D. Fla.).

Judge:             District Judge David C. Godbey

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Air Oasis LLC
  • The Knot Worldwide, Inc.
  • Airplantshop.com, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey; Law Office of Victoria E. Brieant

Patent:            9,430,131 (System, methods, and user interface for organizing unstructured data objects)

Nearby Systems LLC v. International Dairy Queen, Inc. et al (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • American Dairy Queen Corporation
  • International Dairy Queen, Inc.
  • Texas Dairy Queen Operators Council
  • Caleres, Inc. d/b/a Famous Footwear

Plaintiff:         Nearby Systems LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rozier Hardt McDonough

Patents:          10,469,980 (Mashing mapping content displayed on mobile devices); 11,937,145 (Mashing mapping content displayed on mobile devices); 12,185,177 (Mashing mapping content displayed on mobile devices); 9,532,164 (Mashing mapping content displayed on mobile devices)

Ortiz & Associates Consulting, LLC v. Macy’s, Inc. (W.D. Tex., E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge David Counts; District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Macy’s, Inc.
  • The Kroger Co.
  • Staples, Inc. 
  • Costco Wholesale Corporation 
  • Nike, Inc.
  • IKEA US Retail LLC

Plaintiff:         Ortiz & Associates Consulting, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,549,285 (Systems, methods and apparatuses for brokering data between wireless devices, servers and data rendering devices)

Patent Armory Inc. v. General Electric Company (S.D.N.Y., D. Del.).  

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • General Electric Company
  • LetsGetChecked, INC. 
  • Corkcicle, LLC
  • EmployBridge Holding Company 
  • Esler Companies, LLC 
  • Expivia Interaction Marketing Group Inc.
  • Fullstory, Inc.
  • Grove Collaborative, Inc. 
  • HoneyLove Sculptwear, Inc. 
  • HRB Digital LLC 

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patents:          10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

QR Switch, LLC v. Sam’s East, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).            

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; agistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Sam’s East, Inc.
  • Sam’s West, Inc. d/b/a Sam’s Club 
  • Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC
  • Walmart, Inc. 
  • QTR Corporation
  • QuikTrip Corporation d/b/a QuikTrip 

Plaintiff:         QR Switch, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Charhon Callahan Robson & Garza

Patent:            8,532,632 (Cellphone changing an electronic display that contains a barcode); 9,294,542 (Systems and methods for changing an electronic display that contains a barcode)

Quantion LLC v. Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC (E.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge David Counts

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Enea AB
  • Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC
  • Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
  • Hyatt Hotels Corporation

Plaintiff:         QUANTION LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            7,734,283 (Internet accessing method from a mobile station using a wireless network)

Random Chat, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc. (W.D. Tex., E.D. Tex.).

Judges)           District Judge David Counts; District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:

  • Amazon.com, Inc.
  • URBN US Retail LLC f/k/a Anthropologie, Inc.
  • Aldo US, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Random Chat, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            8,402,099 (Method for carrying out a multimedia communication based on a network protocol, particularly tcp/ip and/or udp)

Secure Matrix LLC v. Mattress Firm, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne; District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • American Airlines, Inc.
  • Brookshire Grocery Company
  • Cavender’s Out Of State Stores Ltd. 
  • Celebrating Home Direct LLC 
  • Coburn Supply Company, Inc. 
  • Dal-tile Corporation 
  • Dickey’s Barbecue Restaurants, Inc. 
  • Mattress Firm, Inc.
  • Penney OpCo LLC d/b/a JCPenney 
  • Posados Cafe, Inc.
  • Rent-A-Center, Inc.
  • Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc.
  • Taco Bueno Restaurants, Inc.
  • TGI Fridays Franchisor, LLC 
  • The Mens Wearhouse, LLC 
  • Twin Peaks Restaurants, LP 

Plaintiff:         Secure Matrix LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            8,677,116 (Systems and methods for authentication and verification)

Valtrus Innovations Ltd. et al v. The Home Depot, Inc. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Home Depot USA, Inc.
  • The Home Depot, Inc.

Plaintiffs:

  • Key Patent Innovations Ltd.
  • Valtrus Innovations Ltd.

Pls. Cnsl:        Fabricant

Patents:          7,068,597 (System and method for automatic load balancing in a data-over-cable network); 7,107,326 (Method and system for integrating ip address reservations with policy provisioning); 7,120,832 (Storage device performance monitor); 7,640,332 (System and method for hot deployment/redeployment in grid computing environment); 7,904,686 (Data security for use with a file system)

Virtual Creative Artists, LLC v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC (W.D. Wash., W.D. Tex.).   

Judge:             David A. Ezra

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC 
  • Redfin Corporation 
  • Wayfair LLC

Plaintiff:         Virtual Creative Artists, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Mann Law Group; Direction IP Law

Patents:          9,477,665 (Revenue-generating electronic multi-media exchange and process of operating same); 9,501,480 (Revenue-generating electronic multi-media exchange and process of operating same)

NPEs finished the year busy.* Frequent filers included Alpha Modus, AML IP, ContactWave, DataCloud Technologies, Disintermediation Services, Linfo IP, PacSec3, Patent Armory, S3G Technology, Social Positioning Input Systems, Tiare Technology, Torus Ventures, and Wolverine Barcode IP.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

Alpha Modus, Corp. v. Wakefern Food Corporation et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:                       District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:                       Infringement

Defendants:

  • Shelf Nine LLC
  • Wakefern Food Corporation

Plaintiff:         Alpha Modus, Corp.

Pls. Cnsl:        Dickinson Wright

Patents:          10,360,571 (Method for monitoring and analyzing behavior and uses thereof); 10,853,825 (Method for monitoring and analyzing behavior and uses thereof); 10,977,672 (Method and system for real-time inventory management, marketing, and advertising in a retail store); 11,042,890 (Method and system for customer assistance in a retail store); 11,301,880 (Method and system for inventory management in a retail store)

AML IP LLC v. Albertsons Companies, Inc. (W.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Judge:             District Judge David Counts

Defendants:

  • Albertsons Companies, Inc.
  • Alamo Drafthouse Cinemas, LLC
  • Dunkin’ Brands, Inc. d/b/a Dunkin’ Donuts d/b/a Baskin Robbins
  • La Madeleine De Corps, Inc.

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            7,177,838 (Method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens)

ContactWave LLC v. Macy’s, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Macy’s, Inc.
  • Best Buy Co., Inc. 
  • Nordstrom, Inc.
  • Walgreen Co. d/b/a Walgreens  
  • Walmart, Inc.

Plaintiff:         ContactWave LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            9,531,665 (Information messaging system)

DataCloud Technologies, LLC v. Groupon, Inc. (N.D. Ill.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Groupon, Inc.

Plaintiff:         DataCloud Technologies, LLC 

Pls. Cnsl:        Rozier Hardt McDonough

Patent:            6,651,063 (Data organization and management system and method); 7,209,959 (Apparatus, system, and method for communicating to a network through a virtual domain providing anonymity to a client communicating on the network)

Disintermediation Services, Inc. v. Living Spaces Furniture, LLC (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Living Spaces Furniture, LLC

Plaintiff:         Disintermediation Services, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Gillam & Smith; Global IP Law Group

Patent:            11,240,183 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,336,597 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,349,787 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,855,937 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms);

Linfo IP, LLC v. American Giant, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., S.D. Tex., N.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge A. Joe Fish; District Judge Jane J. Boyle

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Air Oasis LLC
  • American Giant, Inc. 
  • LOOG Guitars, LLC 
  • Stellar Data Recovery Inc.
  • Tekzoom, Inc. d/b/a Perfume Empire

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Law Office of David J. Hoffman; Ramey

Patent:            9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content)

PacSec3, LLC v. CyberArk Software, Inc. (S.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     CyberArk Software, Inc.

Plaintiff:         PacSec3, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            7,523,497 (Packet flooding defense system)

Patent Armory Inc. v. Backcountry.com, LLC (D. Del., D. Mass., E.D. Pa., N.D. Tex., E.D. Tex., E.D. Va., N.D. Ill., S.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Jeffrey L. Schmehl; Judge Ada Brown; District Judge Sam A. Lindsay; District Judge Andrea R. Wood; District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; District Judge David C. Godbey

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Backcountry.com, LLC
  • Benefit Cosmetics LLC
  • Biobot Analytics, Inc.
  • Carbon Health Inc. 
  • Citibank NA 
  • Comerica Bank
  • Computer Aid, Inc.
  • Computer Aid, Inc.
  • Continuum Global Solutions, LLC
  • Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc.
  • Del Taco Restaurants, Inc. 
  • Delta Air Lines, Inc.
  • Digital Federal Credit Union
  • Dominion Dental Services, Inc.
  • First Technology Federal Credit Union d/b/a First Tech Federal Credit Union
  • General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.
  • General Nutrition Corporation
  • GrubHub Inc.
  • Likewize Corp.
  • Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company
  • Optimax Ltd.
  • The American Automobile Association, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law; Garibian Law Offices; Dickinson Wright; DNL Zito

Patent:            10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

S3G Technology LLC v. Walgreen Co. (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Walgreen Co. d/b/a Walgreens

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          10,831,468 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,210,082 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine)

Social Positioning Input Systems, LLC v. PetPace LLC (D. Mass.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     PetPace LLC

Plaintiff:         Social Positioning Input Systems, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Lambert Shortell & Connaughton

Patent:            9,261,365 (Device, system and method for remotely entering, storing and sharing addresses for a positional information device)

Tiare Technology, Inc. v. CKE Restaurants Holdings, Inc. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC
  • CKE Restaurants Holdings, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Tiare Technology, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Davis Firm 

Patents:          10,157,414 (Patron service system and method); 11,195,224 (Patron service system and method); 8,682,729 (Patron service system and method)

Torus Ventures LLC v. Gainsco Auto Insurance Agency, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Gainsco Auto Insurance Agency, Inc. 
  • Germania General Agency, Inc 
  • Globe Life Inc.
  • Golden Bank National Association 
  • Gringo’s Mexican Kitchen No. 1 Inc
  • Guaranty Bank & Trust, NA
  • Higginbotham Insurance Group, Inc
  • Hotchkiss Insurance Agency, LLC 
  • Incline Insurance Group, LLC
  • Insurance Agents Alliance Of Texas, Inc 
  • Gulf States Financial Services, Inc 
  • Interflex Payments LLC
  • Invited Foundation 
  • Iscential Inc.
  • Kleberg Bank, National Association 
  • La Familia Agency LLC d/b/a La Familia Auto Insurance 
  • Landry’s Payroll, Inc.
  • Legend Bank
  • Liberty Bankers Life Insurance Company 
  • Lone Star National Bank

Plaintiff:         Torus Ventures LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            7,203,844 (Method and system for a recursive security protocol for digital copyright control)

Wolverine Barcode IP, LLC v. Costco Wholesale Corporation (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).          

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Costco Wholesale Corporation
  • CVS Pharmacy, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         Wolverine Barcode IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,280,689 (Method and apparatus for conducting offline commerce transactions)

NPEs skipped the usual lull heading into the holidays as filings stayed high.* Frequent filers included Alpha Modus, AML IP, Andra Group, Content Aware, Fall Line Patents, Linfo IP, Patent Armory, S3G Technology, Torus Ventures, and Virtual Creative Artists.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

Alpha Modus, Corp. v. Brookshire Grocery Co. (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Brookshire Grocery Company

Plaintiff:         Alpha Modus, Corp.

Pls. Cnsl:        Dickinson Wright

Patents:          10,360,571 (Method for monitoring and analyzing behavior and uses thereof); 10,853,825 (Method for monitoring and analyzing behavior and uses thereof); 10,977,672 (Method and system for real-time inventory management, marketing, and advertising in a retail store); 11,042,890 (Method and system for customer assistance in a retail store); 11,301,880 (Method and system for inventory management in a retail store)

AML IP LLC v. Aveda Corporation (W.D. Tex., E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge David Counts; District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • Advance Auto Parts, Inc.  
  • AutoZone, Inc.  
  • Aveda Corporation
  • Chick-Fil-A, Inc.
  • CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
  • Walgreen Co. d/b/a Walgreens
  • Whatabrands LLC
  • The Finish Line, Inc.

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            7,177,838 (Method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens)

Andra Group, LP v. Fossil Group, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).            

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Fossil Group, Inc. 
  • GameStop, Inc. 
  • Signet Jewelers, Ltd.
  • Zale Corporation 

Plaintiff:         Andra Group, LP

Pls. Cnsl:        BrusterSorey & Hoover

Patent:            8,078,498 (Virtual showroom system and method)

Content Aware, LLC v. Algolia SAS (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).            

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • Algolia SAS 
  • Nosto Solutions Ltd. 
  • The Home Depot, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Content Aware, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            11,107,098 (System and method for content recognition and data categorization)

Fall Line Patents, LLC v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • 7-Eleven, Inc.
  • Academy, Ltd. d/b/a Academy Sports & Outdoors, Inc. 
  • Advance Auto Parts, Inc.
  • Advance Stores Company, Incorporated  
  • Aldi Inc.
  • Aldi (Texas) LLC 
  • AutoZone, Inc. 
  • Best Buy Co., Inc.
  • Best Buy Stores, LP
  • Brookshire Grocery Company
  • Brinker International, Inc. 
  • Chili’s, Inc.  
  • CBOCS, Inc.
  • CBOCS Properties, Inc.
  • CBOCS Texas, LLC  
  • Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. 
  • Darden Concepts, Inc. d/b/a Darden Restaurants
  • Darden Restaurants, Inc. 
  • Olive Garden of Texas, LLC  
  • RARE Hospitality International, Inc. 
  • DoorDash Essentials, LLC 
  • DoorDash, Inc.  
  • EAN Holdings, LLC d/b/a Enterprise Rent A Car  
  • EAN Services, LLC 
  • Enterprise Holdings, Inc. 
  • Lowe’s Companies, Inc. 
  • Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC 
  • SFM, LLC d/b/a Sprouts Farmers Market  
  • Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.  

Plaintiff:         Fall Line Patents, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Antonelli Harrington & Thompson

Patent:            9,454,748 (System and method for data management)

Linfo IP, LLC v. Dyln, Inc. (W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge David Counts

Claims: Infringement

Defendant:     Dyln, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content)

Oribel Pte Ltd. v. Carters Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Carter’s, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Oribel Pte LTD.

Pls. Cnsl:        Ahmad Zavitsanos & Mensing; Quisenberry Law

Patent:            10,736,437 (Portable activity center)

Patent Armory Inc. v. Campaign Monitor Pty Ltd. (E.D. Tex., D. Colo., W.D. Tex., E.D. Va., W.D. Wis.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Auctane, Inc.
  • Avid Ratings, Inc. 
  • Banner Health
  • Campaign Monitor Pty Ltd.
  • Carnival Corporation
  • Citizen Watch Co., Ltd. 
  • Cognizant Technology Solutions US Corporation
  • Farmers Group, Inc.  
  • Genworth Financial, Inc.
  • Northwestern Mutual LLC 

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

S3G Technology LLC v. BJs Restaurants, Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     BJ’s Restaurants, Inc.

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor); 8,572,571 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,081,897 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine)

Torus Ventures LLC v. First Texas National Bank (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     First Texas National Bank

Plaintiff:         Torus Ventures LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            7,203,844 (Method and system for a recursive security protocol for digital copyright control)

Virtual Creative Artists, LLC v. Cars.com, LLC (N.D. Ill.).

Judge:             District Judge John F. Kness

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Cars.com, LLC

Plaintiff:         Virtual Creative Artists, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Direction IP Law

Patent:            10,339,576 (Revenue-generating electronic multi-media exchange and process of operating same)

NPEs continued an active fall.* Frequent filers included AML IP, Andra Group, Big Will Enterprises, Linfo IP, Patent Armory, S3G Technology and Torus Ventures.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

AML IP LLC v. Petco Animal Supplies, Inc. (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge David Count;  District Judge Leon Schydlower

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.
  • Sally Beauty Supply LLC
  • Sephora USA, Inc.
  • Staples, Inc.
  • The Kroger Co.

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            7,177,838 (Method and apparatus for conducting electronic commerce transactions using electronic tokens)

Andra Group, LP v. Dillard’s, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).  

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.
  • Claire’s Stores, Inc. 
  • Dillard’s, Inc. 
  • Hot Topic, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Andra Group, LP

Pls. Cnsl:        Bruster; Sorey & Hoover

Patent:            8,078,498 (Virtual showroom system and method)

Biogy, Inc. v. Albertsons Companies, Inc. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:     Infringement

Defendants:

  • Albertsons Companies, Inc.
  • Albertsons LLC

Plaintiff:   Biogy, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Global IP Law Group

Patent:      7,669,236 (Determining whether to grant access to a passcode protected system)

Big Will Enterprises Inc. v. Kia America, Inc. (W.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Kia America, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Big Will Enterprises Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Eureka Intellectual Property Law

Patent:            10,521,846 (Targeted advertisement selection for a wireless communication device (WCD)); 8,452,273 (Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using accelerometer of wireless communication device); 8,559,914 (Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) system); 8,737,951 (Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) systems and methods); 9,049,558 (Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using sensor data of wireless communication device (WCD) and initiating activity-based actions)

Data Fence LLC v. Aura Sub, LLC (D. Mass.).

Judge:             District Judge Indira Talwani

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Aura Sub, LLC

Plaintiff:         Data Fence LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Dickinson Wright; Rabicoff Law

Patent:            8,917,843 (Methods and systems for inbound call control); 9,491,286 (Methods and systems for inbound call control); 9,819,797 (Methods and systems for inbound call control)

EasyWeb Innovations LLC v. Sync.com Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Sync.com Inc.

Plaintiff:         EasyWeb Innovations, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Hecht Partners

Patent:            10,114,905 (Individual user selectable multi-level authorization method for accessing a computer system)

FlexShopper, Inc. v. Acima Digital, LLC d/b/a Acima Leasing (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Acima Digital, LLC d/b/a Acima Leasing 
  • Acima Holdings, LLC d/b/a Acima Leasing
  • Katapult Holdings, Inc.
  • Upbound Group, Inc.  

Plaintiff:         FlexShopper, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan; Ward Smith & Hill

Patent             10,089,682 (Computer implemented system and method for a rent-to-own program); 10,282,778 (Computer implemented system and method for a rent-to-own program); 10,891,687 (Computer implemented system and method for a rent-to-own program); 11,966,969 (Computer implemented system and method for a rent-to-own program); 12,067,611 (Computer implemented system and method for a rent-to-own program)

Gravel Rating Systems LLC v. Dr. Martens AirWair USA, LLC (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).  

Judge:             District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III

Claims:     Infringement

Defendants:              

  • Dr. Martens AirWair USA, LLC
  • Pacific Sunwear of California LLC d/b/a PacSun 

Plaintiff:   Gravel Rating Systems LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Devlin Law Firm

Patent:      7,590,636 (Knowledge filter)

Happy Products, Inc. v. Ace Hardware Corp. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Ace Hardware Corporation
  • Big Lots, Inc.
  • CVS Health Corporation
  • JOANN Inc.
  • Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
  • Ollie’s Bargain Outlet Holdings, Inc.
  • Target Corporation
  • Walgreen Co. d/b/a Walgreens
  • Walmart, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Happy Products, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Devlin Law Firm; Squire Patton Boggs

Patent:            9,642,454 (Multiple viewing angle media support); RE48,479 (Multiple viewing angle media support)

Linfo IP, LLC v. Charles Tyrwhitt, Inc. (S.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge David Counts

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • AEMBR Company
  • Blenders Eyewear, LLC 
  • Boston Foundry, Inc. d/b/a Made In Cookware 
  • Charles Tyrwhitt, Inc.  
  • Legendairy Milk, LLC
  • Rhone Apparel, Inc.
  • Tommy John, Inc.  
  • Waimate B LLC d/b/a Soludos

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content)

Patent Armory Inc. v. American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. (D. Del., D.N.J.).

Claims:     Infringement

Defendants:              

  • American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. 
  • Bendix Commercial Vehicle Systems LLC 
  • Canon Financial Services, Inc. 
  • Liberty Sport, Inc. 
  • Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. 
  • Purdue University Global, Inc.
  • Wesco International, Inc. 

Plaintiff:   Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law; Garibian Law Offices

Patent            10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

Pointwise Ventures LLC v. Lowe’s Companies, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • ASOS.com Limited 
  • Hennes & Mauritz AB 
  • Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
  • Macy’s, Inc.
  • Penney OpCo LLC d/b/a JCPenney
  • Urban Outfitters, Inc. 
  • Wayfair Inc.
  • YOOX Net-a-Porter Group SpA 

Plaintiff:         Pointwise Ventures LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:           8,471,812 (Pointing and identification device)

S3G Technology LLC v. Six Continents Hotels, Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:     Infringement

Defendant:      Six Continents Hotels, Inc. d/b/a InterContinental Hotels Group

Plaintiff:   S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patent:      10,387,140 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor); 9,304,758 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine)

Torus Ventures LLC v. Azuma Leasing, LLC (W.D. Tex., E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Xavier Rodriguez; District Judge David Counts; District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:    

  • Azuma Leasing, LLC
  • First National Bank of Sonora
  • First Texas National Bank
  • First National Title Insurance Company

Plaintiff:         Torus Ventures LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            7,203,844 (Method and system for a recursive security protocol for digital copyright control)

NPEs had a slow start to the fall which is traditionally busier. Frequent filers included Andra Group, Patent Armory and Random Chat.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

Andra Group, LP v. Nordstrom, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).            

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Nordstrom, Inc.
  • Mejuri, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         Andra Group, LP

Pls. Cnsl:        Bruster; Sorey & Hoover

Patent:            8,078,498 (Virtual showroom system and method)

Patent Armory Inc. v. Time2Market Cloud Services LLC (D. Colo., N.D. Ill., E.D. Va., S. D. Tex.).

Judges:           Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter; District Judge Elaine E. Bucklo; District Judge Martha M. Pacold

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Time2Market Cloud Services LLC
  • ModivCare Solutions, LLC 
  • Employers Mutual Casualty Company 
  • Aims Community College 
  • InspereX LLC 
  • Inb, N.a. 
  • Help at Home, LLC
  • Mercury Systems, Inc.
  • Maximus, Inc.
  • Food Huggers, Inc.
  • Efinancial, LLC
  • BruMate, Inc. d/b/a BruMate Coolers
  • American Heart Association 
  • Alight Solutions LLC 

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patents:          10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269, 253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing);

9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

Random Chat, LLC v. Costco Wholesale Corporation (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Costco Wholesale Corporation
  • Gartner, Inc. 
  • Kate Spade & Company LLC  
  • Lamps Plus, Inc. 
  • Lowe’s Companies, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         Random Chat LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            8,402,099 (Method for carrying out a multimedia communication based on a network protocol, particularly tcp/ip and/or udp)

NPEs finished the summer quietly.* Frequent filers included AML IP, Convergent Assets, I Pee Holding, Linfo IP, and S3G Technology.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

AML IP LLC v. Petco Animal Supplies, Inc. (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge David Counts

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Petco Animal Supplies, Inc. 
  • Tractor Supply Company 

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            6,876,979 (Electronic commerce bridge system)

Convergent Assets LLC v. The Home Depot, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • The Home Depot, Inc.
  • Walmart, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         Convergent Assets LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Direction IP Law

Patent:            11,049,138 (Systems and methods for targeted advertising)

Dynamic Data Innovations LLC v. Old Navy, LLC (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Old Navy, LLC

Plaintiff:         Dynamic Data Innovations LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rozier Hardt McDonough

Patent:            9,632,676 (Systems and methods for navigating a set of data objects)

Global Connect Technology, Inc. v. Christie’s International PLC (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).            

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • Christie’s International PLC 
  • Best Buy Co., Inc. 
  • Costco Wholesale Corporation 

Plaintiff:         Global Connect Technology, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:         Garteiser Honea

Patent:            7,246,128 (Data storage, retrieval, manipulation and display tools enabling multiple hierarchical points of view)

H2 Intellect LLC v. The Home Depot, Inc. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Home Depot Product Authority, LLC
  • Home Depot USA, Inc.
  • The Home Depot, Inc.

Plaintiff:         H2 Intellect LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Winston & Strawn

Patents:          11,948,171 (Exclusive delivery of content within geographic areas); 8,433,296 (Exclusive delivery of content within geographic areas)

I Pee Holding, LLC v. Claire’s Stores, Inc. et al (N.D. Ill.).

Judge:             District Judge Sara L. Ellis

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • CBI Distributing Corporation
  • Claire’s Stores, Inc.

Plaintiff:         I Pee Holding, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Fox Rothschild

Patent:            10,064,461 (Light string with lighting elements surrounded by decorative shroud and retained by snap-fit enclosure system)

Linfo IP, LLC v. Brompton Bicycle, Inc. (E.D.N.Y., E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • Brompton Bicycle, Inc.
  • Chubbies, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey; Hecht Partners

Patents:          9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content); 9,430,131 (System, methods, and user interface for organizing unstructured data objects)

RavenWhite Licensing LLC v. Home Depot USA, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).    

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Home Depot USA, Inc.
  • The Home Depot, Inc. 
  • Walmart, Inc. 
  • Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC

Plaintiff:         RavenWhite Licensing LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Kramer Alberti Lim & Tonkovich; Ward Smith & Hill

Patents:          10,594,823 (Method and apparatus for storing information in a browser storage area of a client device); 11,562,402 (Advertising model)

S3G Technology LLC v. Jack in the Box, Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Jack in the Box, Inc.

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:         Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          10,831,468 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,210,082 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine)

NPEs had a typically slow summer.* Frequent filers included AML IP, Analytical Technologies, Big Will Enterprises, Fall Line Patents, Linfo IP, Patent Armory, Random Chat, RFCyber, S3G Technology, and Torus Ventures.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

AML IP, LLC v. Williams-Sonoma, Inc. (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Leon Schydlower, District Judge Fred Biery, District Judge Robert Pitman

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
  • Sephora USA, Inc.
  • Luxottica of America, Inc.
  • Vuori, Inc.
  • At Home Stores LLC

Plaintiff:         AML IP LLC 

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            6,876,979 (Electronic commerce bridge system)

Analytical Technologies, LLC v. Einstein Noah Restaurant Group, Inc. (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Einstein Noah Restaurant Group, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Analytical Technologies, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Garteiser Honea; Sinergia Technology Law Group

Patent:            8,799,083 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements)

Big Will Enterprises Inc. v. Aware360 Ltd. (W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Robert Pitman

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Aware360 Ltd.

Plaintiff:         Big Will Enterprises Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Eureka Intellectual Property Law

Patents:          10,521,846 (Targeted advertisement selection for a wireless communication device (WCD)); 8,452,273 (Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using accelerometer of wireless communication device); 8,559,914 (Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) system); 8,737,951 (Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) systems and methods); 9,049,558 (Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using sensor data of wireless communication device (WCD) and initiating activity-based actions)

Disintermediation Services, Inc. v. The Kroger Co. et al (E.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:    Kroger Texas LP, The Kroger Co.

Plaintiff:         Disintermediation Services, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Gillam & Smith; Global IP Law Group

Patents:          11,240,183 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,336,597 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,349,787 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms); 11,855,937 (Two-way real time communication system that allows asymmetric participation in conversations across multiple electronic platforms)

Fall Line Patents, LLC v. Wingstop Franchising LLC (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).    

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Wingstop Franchising LLC
  • Wingstop Inc.
  • Wingstop Restaurants, Inc.
  • Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC 
  • CKE Restaurants Holdings, Inc. 
  • Domino’s Pizza Franchising LLC
  • Domino’s Pizza, Inc.
  • Domino’s Pizza LLC
  • El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc.
  • El Pollo Loco, Inc.
  • Different Rules, LLC d/b/a Jack in the Box 
  • Jack In The Box Inc.
  • A Sub Above, LLC 
  • Jersey Mikes Franchise Systems, Inc. 
  • Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corporation 
  • Krispy Kreme, Inc.
  • Raising Cane’s Franchising, LLC 
  • Raising Cane’s Restaurants, LLC 
  • Raising Cane’s USA, LLC
  • Applebee’s Franchisor LLC
  • Applebees Restaurant Holdings, LLC 
  • Applebee’s Restaurants, LLC
  • Dine Brands Global, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Fall Line Patents, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Antonelli Harrington & Thompson

Patent:            9,454,748 (System and method for data management)

Linfo IP, LLC v. Rhone Apparel, Inc. (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Judges:           David A. Ezra, District Judge Xavier Rodriguez

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Rhone Apparel, Inc.
  • Untuckit, LLC

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content)

Patent Armory Inc. v. Global Payments Direct Inc (S.D.N.Y.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Global Payments Direct Inc

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patents:          10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

Pemberton v. Jack in the Box Inc. (S.D. Cal.).

Judges:           Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt; District Judge Todd W. Robinson

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Jack In The Box Inc.

Plaintiff:         Kirk Pemberton

Pls. Cnsl:        FisherBroyles

Patents:          7,870,687 (Signage apparatus having simple magnet-based structure for ease of modification); 8,205,369 (Signage apparatus having simple magnet-based structure for ease of modification); 8,464,447 (Signage apparatus having simple magnet-based structure for ease of modification)

Random Chat LLC v. Big Lots Stores, LLC (E.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.).            

Jusges:            District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, District Judge David Counts

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Big Lots Stores, LLC
  • Ace Hardware Corporation
  • BPS Direct, LLC d/b/a Bass Pro Shops

Plaintiff:         Random Chat LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            8,402,099 (Method for carrying out a multimedia communication based on a network protocol, particularly tcp/ip and/or udp)

RFCyber Corp. v. Costco Wholesale Corporation (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Costco Wholesale Corporation
  • The Kroger Co.  
  • Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products, US 
  • Shell Information Technology International BV  
  • Starbucks Corporation 
  • Walmart, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         RFCyber Corp.

Pls. Cnsl:        Fabricant

Patent:            8,448,855 (Method and apparatus for funding an electronic purse)

S3G Technology LLC v. Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (E.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne, District Judge Orlando L. Garcia

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc.
  • Domino’s Pizza LLC

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          8,572,571 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,081,897 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 10,261,774 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor)

Torus Ventures LLC v. Broadway National Bank (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Broadway National Bank
  • Cawley Partners, LLC
  • Cinemark USA, Inc. 
  • CIS Group, LLC
  • Classic Bank, NA
  • Commercial Bank of Texas, National Association
  • Community First Health Plans, Inc. 

Plaintiff:         Torus Ventures LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law

Patent:            7,203,844 (Method and system for a recursive security protocol for digital copyright control)

NPE activity slowed slightly in June.* Frequent filers included Analytical Technologies, Convergent Assets, Patent Armory, and S3G Technology.

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

Analytical Technologies, LLC v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.
  • American Dairy Queen Corporation  
  • Denny’s Corporation
  • Raising Cane’s USA, LLC 
  • Starbucks Corporation 

Plaintiff:         Analytical Technologies, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Garteiser Honea; Sinergia Technology Law Group

Patents:          8,224,700 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements); 8,799,083 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements); 9,911,164 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements)

Andra Group, LP v. JC Penney Company, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).   

Judge:             District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • JC Penney Company, Inc. 
  • JC Penney Corporation, Inc.
  • Penney OpCo LLC d/b/a JCPenney  
  • H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB 

Plaintiff:         Andra Group, LP

Pls. Cnsl:        Nix Patterson; Sorey & Hoover

Patent:            8,078,498 (Virtual showroom system and method)

Convergent Assets LLC v. Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).    

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc.
  • Ulta Beauty, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Convergent Assets LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Direction IP Law

Patent:            11,049,138 (Systems and methods for targeted advertising)

Fleet Connect Solutions LLC v. The Kroger Co. (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     The Kroger Co.

Plaintiff:         Fleet Connect Solutions LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Rozier Hardt McDonough

Patents:          10,671,949 (System and methods for management of mobile field assets via wireless handheld devices); 6,549,583 (Optimum phase error metric for OFDM pilot tone tracking in wireless LAN); 6,633,616 (OFDM pilot tone tracking for wireless LAN); 7,206,837 (Intelligent trip status notification); 7,741,968 (System and method for navigation tracking of individuals in a group); 7,747,291 (Wireless communication method); 8,005,053 (Channel interference reduction); 9,299,044 (System and methods for management of mobile field assets via wireless handheld devices); 9,747,565 (System and methods for management of mobile field assets via wireless handheld devices)

Patent Armory Inc. v. CBC Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Corner Bakery Café (multiple cases) (N.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Brantley Starr, District Judge Jane J. Boyle, District Judge A. Joe Fish   

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • CBC Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Corner Bakery Cafe
  • Which Wich, Inc.
  • Yoshinoya America, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Garteiser Honea; Rabicoff Law

Patents:          10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction)

S3G Technology LLC v. Supercuts, Inc. (W.D. Tex.).

Judge:             Judge David A. Ezra

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Supercuts, Inc.

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patent:            10,831,468 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,210,082 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine)

NPE activity stayed steady this month.* Frequent filers included Adaptive Avenue Associates, AML IP, Consolidated Transaction Processing, Linfo IP, Patent Armory, and S3G Technology

As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database. Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s litigation history. Finally, please let me know if you have thoughts about the report or changes you would like to see. I am preparing it as a service for retailers and their supply chain who may want an overview of the patent litigation landscape. So, I am very open to your suggestions for improving the report.

* Note I am catching up on a backlog because of some very busy IP litigation over the last year or so.

Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Saks Fifth Avenue, LLC d/b/a Saks Fifth Avenue (N.D. Ill.).

Judge:             District Judge Steven C. Seeger

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Saks Fifth Avenue, LLC d/b/a Saks Fifth Avenue

Plaintiff:         Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Direction IP Law

Patents:          7,171,629 (Customizable web site access system and method therefore); 7,428,707 (Customizable web site access system and method therefore)

AML IP, LLC v. DeLonghi America, Inc (D. Del., W.D. Tex.).

Judges:           District Judge Brian R. Martinotti; District Judge Alan D. Albright  

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • DeLonghi America, Inc
  • Jimmy Choo USA, Inc.
  • Cost Plus World Market, LLC
  • Steven Madden, Ltd. 
  • Aveda Corporation 
  • URBN US Retail LLC f/k/a Anthropologie, Inc.

Plaintiff:         AML IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey; Hecht Partners

Patent:            6,876,979 (Electronic commerce bridge system)

Analytical Technologies, LLC v. Darden Restaurants, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:   

  • Darden Restaurants, Inc.
  • delivery.com, LLC
  • Five Guys Properties, LLC
  • Roark Capital, Inc. d/b/a Subway 

Plaintiff:         Analytical Technologies, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Garteiser Honea

Patents:          8,224,700 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements); 8,799,083 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements); 9,911,164 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements); 10,783,596 (System and method for managing restaurant customer data elements)

Communication Interface Technologies, LLC v. Auntie Anne’s Franchisor SPV LLC   (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).         

Judges:           District Judge Sean D. Jordan; District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III; District Judge Sean D. Jordan

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Auntie Anne’s Franchisor SPV LLC
  • The Buckle, Inc.
  • Carter’s, Inc.  
  • Destination XL Group, Inc.
  • FAT Brands, Inc.
  • GameStop, Inc.
  • Murphy Oil USA, Inc. 
  • Panda Restaurant Group, Inc.
  • Pei Wei Asian Diner, LLC 
  • Rooms To Go.com, Inc.  
  • Sleep Number Corporation
  • Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
  • Whatabrands LLC

Plaintiff:         Communication Interface Technologies, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Shea Beaty

Patents:          6,574,239 (Virtual connection of a remote unit to a server); 8,266,296 (Application-layer evaluation of communications received by a mobile device); 8,291,010 (Virtual connection of a remote unit to a server)

Consolidated Transaction Processing LLC v. The Children’s Place, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).    

Judge:             District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • The Children’s Place, Inc. 
  • Eyemart Express LLC 
  • Mattress Firm, Inc. 
  • RTG Furniture Corp.
  • Sally Beauty Supply LLC 
  • Tilly’s, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Consolidated Transaction Processing LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Shea Beaty

Patents:          8,396,743 (Sending targeted product offerings based on personal information); 8,712,846 (Sending targeted product offerings based on personal information)

Linfo IP, LLC v. Alibaba Group US Inc. (N.D. Cal.).

Judge:             Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson

Claims:           Infringement

Defendant:     Alibaba Group US Inc.

Plaintiff:         Linfo IP, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Ramey

Patent:            9,092,428 (System, methods and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content)

Patent Armory, Inc. v. California Tortilla Group, Inc. (D. Md., D. Del.).

Judge:             District Judge Paula Xinis

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • California Tortilla Group, Inc.
  • Planmeca USA Inc.
  • Straumann USA, LLC
  • Carl Zeiss Industrial Quality Solutions, LLC 
  • Ledo Pizza System, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Patent Armory Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Rabicoff Law; DNL Zito; Garibian Law Offices

Patents:          10,237,420 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 10,491,748 (Intelligent communication routing system and method); 7,023,979 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing); 7,269,253 (Telephony control system with intelligent call routing);

9,456,086 (Method and system for matching entities in an auction); 7,256,899 (Wireless methods and systems for three-dimensional non-contact shape sensing)

Push Data LLC v. Belk, Inc. (multiple cases) (E.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Belk, Inc.
  • Cowboy Chicken Franchise Inc.
  • Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
  • Five Below, Inc. 
  • Michaels Stores, Inc. 
  • Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. 
  • Smoothie King Franchises, Inc.
  • Torrid LLC

Plaintiff:         Push Data LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Shea Beaty

Patents:          7058395 (Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems); 7,212,811 (Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems); 7,292,844 (Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems)

S3G Technology LLC v. Massage Envy Franchising LLC (multiple cases) (W.D. Tex.).

Claims:           Infringement

Defendants:

  • Massage Envy Franchising, LLC.
  • Rooms To Go.com, Inc.

Plaintiff:         S3G Technology LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          10,387,140 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,304,758 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 9,940,124 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 10,261,774 (Modification of terminal and service provider machines using an update server machine); 11,662,995 (Network efficient location-based dialogue sequence using virtual processor)