The trolls started slow in January.  Repeat filers included Landmark Technology, Hawk Technology, MPHJ, Marshall Feature Recognition, 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.

JC Penney Corporation, Inc. v. Eolas Technologies, Inc. et al, (N.D. Cal.).

Claim:             Declaratory Judgment

Defendants:

  • Eolas Technologies, Inc.
  • The Regents of the University of California

Plaintiff:         JC Penney Corporation, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        JC Penney Corporation, Inc.

Patents:          8,082,293 (Distributed hypermedia method and system for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document); and 8,086,662 (Distributed hypermedia method and system for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document).

Hawk Technology Systems, LLC v. Hollywood Beach Resort Rental Program, LLC, (S.D. Fla.; D.N.J.; M.D. Fla.; N.D. Ill.) (multiple cases).

Judges:           District Judge James I. Cohn; District Judge K. Michael Moore; Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Arpert; District Judge William J. Zloch; District Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr.; Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Kelly; District Judge John Z. Lee

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Hollywood Beach Resort Rental Program, LLC
  • Sakert Shoprites, Inc.
  • Costco Wholesale Corporation
  • Universal City Development Partners, Ltd.
  • Pacific Langham Chicago Corporation, d/b/a The Langham Chicago

Plaintiff:         Hawk Technology Systems, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Lipscomb Eisenberg & Baker; Patrick J Cerillo, LLC; Schulz Law

Patent:           RE 43,462 (Video monitoring and conferencing system).

Tejas Research, LLC v. Dillard’s, Inc., (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • O’Reilly Automotive, Inc.
  • QVC, Inc.
  • Starbucks Corporation
  • Tractor Supply Company

Plaintiff:         Tejas Research, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Austin Hansley PLLC

Patent:           6,006,231 (File format for an image including multiple versions of an image, and related system and method).

NovelPoint Tracking LLC v. Austad’s Golf, Inc., (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Budget Golf II, Inc.
  • Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc.
  • Golf Galaxy, Inc.
  • Edwin Watts Golf Shops, LLC
  • Global Value Commerce, Inc. dba Global Golf
  • Pro Golf Discount, Inc.
  • Golfsmith International Holdings Inc dba Golfsmith          
  • Golf & Tennis Pro Shop, Inc.
  • The Golf Warehouse, Inc.
  • Worldwide Golf Enterprises, Inc.

Plaintiff:         NovelPoint Tracking LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Spangler Law; Stamoulis & Weinblatt

Patent:           6,442,485 (Method and apparatus for an automatic vehicle location, collision notification, and synthetic voice).

MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC v. Dillard’s, Inc., (D. Del.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • The Coca-Cola Company
  • Huhtamaki Americas, Inc.
  • Unum Group  

Plaintiff:         MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Farney Daniels; Stamoulis & Weinblatt

Patents:          7,477,410 (Distributed computer architecture and process for virtual copying); and 8,488,173 (Distributed computer architecture and process for document management).

Ideative Product Ventures, Inc. v. CTA Digital Inc., (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Judge:             District Judge Richard A. Schell

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Staples, Inc.
  • StarTech.com USA, LLP
  • Lindy Computer Connection Technology, Inc.
  • Hewlett-Packard Company
  • Monoprice, Inc.
  • Monster Cable Products, Inc.
  • Tera Grand Corporation
  • Philips Electronics North America Corporation
  • TigerDirect, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Ideative Product Ventures, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Klemchuk Kubasta

Patent:           7,494,343 (Multiple degrees of freedom connectors and adapters).

Marshall Feature Recognition LLC v. Kao USA, Inc., (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

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

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Select Comfort Retail Corporation
  • The Procter & Gamble Company
  • Walgreen Co.

Plaintiff:         Marshall Feature Recognition LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Austin Hansley PLLC

Patent:           6,886,750 (Method and apparatus for accessing electronic data via a familiar printed medium).

Wolf Run Hollow, LLC v. Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc., (E.D. Tex.)

Judge:             District Judge Rodney Gilstrap

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Wolf Run Hollow, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Austin Hansley PLLC

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

Landmark Technology, LLC v. Deluxe Corp., (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Louis Vuitton North America Inc.
  • Newell Rubbermaid, Inc.
  • Nutrisystem, Inc.
  • The Children’s Place Retail Stores, Inc.
  • Union Pacific Corp.

Plaintiff:         Landmark Technology, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell; Parker Bunt & Ainsworth

Patents:          5,576,951 (Automated sales and services system); and 7,010,508 (Automated multimedia data processing network).

Online News Link LLC v. Backcountry.com, Inc., (D. Del.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Bodybuilding.com, LLC
  • Evite, Inc
  • Provide Commerce, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Online News Link LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        DiNovo Price Ellwanger & Hardy; Farnan

Patents:          7,181,758 (Information distribution and processing system); 7,508,789 (Information distribution and processing system); and 8,457,545 (Information distribution and processing system).

Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. MasterCard Inc., (D. Del.).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     MasterCard Inc.

Plaintiff:         Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Heninger Garrison Davis; Stamoulis & Weinblatt

Patent:           7,096,003 (Transaction security apparatus).

Lone Star WiFi LLC v. Omni Hotel Corporation et al, (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  • Omni Hotels Corporation
  • Omni Hotels Management Corporation
  • Marriott International, Inc.

Plaintiff:         Lone Star WiFi LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Nelson Bumgardner Casto; Ward & Smith Law Firm

Patents:          7,490,348 (Wireless network having multiple communication allowances); 8,312,286 (Wireless network having multiple communication allowances); an 8,583,935 (Wireless network having multiple communication allowances).

E2E Processing, Inc. v. Cabela’s Incorporated, (E.D. Tex.) (multiple cases).

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

Claim:             Infringement

Defendants:

  •  Crocs, Inc.
  • Crocs Retail LLC
  • Hallmark Cards Incorporated
  • Hallmark.com, LLC
  • Hallmark Interactive LLC
  • Nordstrom, Inc.

Plaintiff:         E2E Processing, Inc.

Pls. Cnsl:        Liner; Spangler Law

Patent:           6,981,222 (End-to-end transaction processing and statusing system and method).

Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC et al v. CNA Financial Corporation, (N.D. Ill.).

Judge:             District Judge Marvin E. Aspen

Claim:             Infringement

Defendant:     CNA Financial Corporation

Plaintiffs:

  • Autoscribe Corporation
  • Pollin Patent Licensing, LLC

Pls. Cnsl:        Niro Haller & Niro

Patent:           7,117,171 (System and method for making a payment from a financial account).