The trolls ended the year quietly, as they often do.  Repeat filers included ArrivalStar, Eclipse IP, GPNE and Wolf Run Hollow.

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 ways to improve the report for you.

Patent:            5,872,589 (Interactive TV system for mass media distribution).

Eclipse IP LLC v. Dolls Kill, Inc., (C.D. Cal.) (multiple cases).

Judges:           Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick; District Judge Fernando M. Olguin; District Judge George H. Wu; District Judge Gary A. Feess; District Judge Christina A. Snyder; District Judge Dale S. Fischer; Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth; Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams; District Judge Otis D. Wright, II

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Dolls Kill, Inc.
  • PC Connection, Inc.
  • Lulu’s Fashion Lounge, Inc.
  • Gilt Groupe, Inc.
  • Google Inc.
  • Waze, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Eclipse IP LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Newport Trial Group; and Olavi Dunne

Patents:          7,119,716 (Response systems and methods for notification systems for modifying future notifications); 7,319,414 (Secure notification messaging systems and methods using authentication indicia); 7,876,239 (Secure notification messaging systems and methods using authentication indicia); 7,479,899 (Notification systems and methods enabling a response to cause connection between a notified PCD and a delivery or pickup representative); and 8,068,037 (Advertisement systems and methods for notification systems).

Phoenix Licensing, LLC et al v. AAA Life Insurance Company, (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • AAA Life Insurance Company
  • American Airlines, Inc.
  • AT&T, Inc.
  • AT&T Mobility, LLC
  • Carnival Corporation & PLC
  • Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd.
  • Chrysler Group LLC
  • Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC
  • Fidelity Investments, Inc.
  • FMR LLC
  • General Motors Company

Plaintiffs:

  • LPL Licensing, LLC
  • Phoenix Licensing, LLC
  • Physicians Life Insurance Company
  • Physicians Mutual Insurance Company
  • Sallie Mae, Inc.
  • Upromise Inc.
  • United Airlines, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Russ August & Kabat

Patents:          5,987,434 (Apparatus and method for transacting marketing and sales of financial products); 7,856,375 (Customized communication document creation system and method); 8,234,184 (Automated reply generation direct marketing system); 7,860,744 (System and method for automatically providing personalized notices concerning financial products and/or services); 8,352,317 (System for facilitating production of variable offer communications); 7,890,366 (Personalized communication documents, system and method for preparing same); 8,606,632 (System, method, and computer program product for selecting and presenting financial products and services); and 8,445,524 (Solid forms of bendamustine hydrochloride).

LPL Licensing, LLC et al v., (E.D. Tex. (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Comcast Cable Communications, LLC
  • Comcast Corporation
  • DirecTV, Inc.
  • DirecTV LLC
  • Sprint Corporation
  • Verizon Communications, Inc.
  • Verizon Wireless, Inc.
  • Dell Inc.
  • Toyota Financial Savings Bank
  • Toyota Motor North America, Inc.
  • Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc.
  • Delta Air Lines, Inc.
  • Ford Motor Company
  • Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.
  • Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
  • Wells Fargo & Co.
  • Wells Fargo Insurance, Inc.

Plaintiffs:

  • LPL Licensing, LLC
  • Phoenix Licensing, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Russ August & Kabat

Patents:          5,987,434 (Apparatus and method for transacting marketing and sales of financial products); 7,860,744 (System and method for automatically providing personalized notices concerning financial products and/or services); 7,890,366 (Personalized communication documents, system and method for preparing same); 8,234,184 (Automated reply generation direct marketing system); 8,352,317 (System for facilitating production of variable offer communications); 8,606,632 (System, method, and computer program product for selecting and presenting financial products and services); and 7,856,375 (Customized communication document creation system and method).

MyMedicalRecords, Inc. v. Walgreen Co., (C.D. Cal.).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     Walgreen Co.

Plaintiff:         MyMedicalRecords, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor

Patent:            8,498,883 (Method for providing a user with a service for accessing and collecting prescriptions).

GPNE Corp. v. Rollins, Inc., (D. Del.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Cadec Global, Inc.
  • Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation
  • FleetMatics USA, LLC
  • Amerigas Partners, LP

Plaintiff:         GPNE Corp.

Pls. Cnsl:        Niro Haller & Niro; O’Kelly Ernst & Bielli

Patents:          7,555,267 (Network communication system wherein a node obtains resources for transmitting data by transmitting two reservation requests); and 8,086,240 (Data communication system using a reserve request and four frequencies to enable transmitting data packets which can include a count value and termination indication information).

Paid, Inc. v. eBay Inc., (D. Mass.).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     eBay Inc.

Plaintiff:         Paid, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Hunton & Williams

Patents:          7,930,237 (Method and system for improved online auction); 8,352,357 (Method and system for improved online auction); and 8,521,642 (Method and system for improved online auction).

Appistry, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al, (E.D. Mo.).

Judge:             District Judge Henry E. Autrey

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Amazon.com, Inc.
  • Amazon Web Services, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Appistry, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Haar and Woods; The Simon Law Firm

Patents:          8,200,746 (System and method for territory-based processing of information); and 8,341,209 (System and method for processing information via networked computers including request handlers, process handlers, and task handlers).

ArrivalStar SA et al v. Peter Wittwer Global Logistics, (M.D. Fla.).

Judges:           Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun, III; District Judge Steven D. Merryday

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     Peter Wittwer Global Logistics

Plaintiffs:

  • ArrivalStar SA
  • Melvino Technologies Limited

Pls. Cnsl:        Leslie Robert Evans & Associates

Patents:          6,904,359 (Notification systems and methods with user-definable notifications based upon occurance of events); 6,952,645 (System and method for activation of an advance notification system for monitoring and reporting status of vehicle travel); and 7,400,970 (System and method for an advance notification system for monitoring and reporting proximity of a vehicle).

Wolf Run Hollow, LLC v. Sports Authority, Inc., (N.D. Ill.) (multiple cases).

Judge:             District Judge Ronald A. Guzman; District Judge Sara L. Ellis

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Sports Authority, Inc.
  • Meijer Inc.

Plaintiff:         Wolf Run Hollow, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Parikh Law Group

Patent:           6,115,817 (Methods and systems for facilitating transmission of secure messages across insecure networks).

Sonic Industry, LLC v. Public Storage, Inc., (E.D. Tex.; N.D. Ill.) (multiple cases)

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap; District Judge Sara L. Ellis; District Judge John W. Darrah; District Judge James B. Zagel; District Judge Milton I. Shadur

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Public Storage, Inc.
  • RadioShack Corporation
  • Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc.  
  • Travelocity.com LP
  • United Parcel Service of America, Inc.
  • Carter’s, Inc.
  • The Coca-Cola Company
  • American Airlines, Inc.
  • iRobot Corporation
  • RMG Networks, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Sonic Industry, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Austin Hansley PLLC; and Parikh Law Group

Patent:           5,954,793 (Remote limit-setting information distribution system).