Location Based Services patent challenged as likely invalid

On August 21 2017, Unified, represented by Finnegan, filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 7,860,648 owned and asserted by Location Based Services, LLC, a subsidiary of Leigh Rothschild according to sites, a well-known NPE. This patent was previously prosecuted and owned by Intellectual Ventures, before being transferred to Mr. Rothschild. 

LBS originally went after Rand McNally, Garmin, MiTAC Digital, Niantic, and Trimble.  At the start of this month, they filed suit against Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T. The ‘648 patent is one of five related patents being asserted against the carriers.

To read the petition and view the entire case proceeding, please visit our PTAB Portal.

First-Class patent challenged as likely invalid

On August 14, 2017, Unified, represented by Finnegan, filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 6,014,089 owned and asserted by First-Class Monitoring, LLC, a subsidiary of Monument Patent Holdings, LLC, a well-known NPE. Historically, Monument Patent Holdings has worked closely with Dominion Harbor, another notorious NPE, to target operating companies. 

The '089 patent, directed to a method for transmitting data using a digital control channel of a wireless network, has been asserted in multiple district court cases against operating companies such as Bank of America, Citigroup, CalAmp, and JPMorgan Chase.

To read the petition and view the entire case proceeding, please see our PTAB Portal.

Catonian IP patent challenged as likely invalid

On August 11, 2017, Unified, represented by Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 8,799,468 owned and asserted by Catonian IP Management, LLC, a subsidiary of IP Valuation Partners LLC, a well-known NPE. The '468 patent, directed to a system for regulating access to and distributing content in a network, was first asserted in March 2017 in two district court cases against Cequel Communications and Charter Communications. 

To read the petition and view the entire case proceeding, please see our PTAB Portal.

Federal Circuit holds that third parties can defend appeals

In a first, the Federal Circuit in Personal Audio LLC v. Electronic Frontier Foundation, No. 16-1123, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Aug. 7, 2017) has ruled that third-party appellees do not need Article III standing to defend appeals from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB).  The Court concluded that only the party invoking the appeal, appellant Personal Audio, required standing, which ended the inquiry.  Thus, appellee Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the defending party, did not.  The court also affirmed the PTAB’s decision to invalidate Personal Audio, LLC’s podcasting patent.  The decision means that parties like Unified Patents that have prevailed at the PTAB need not establish separate Article III standing to defend an appeal. 

Background

In the case (IPR2014-00070), the EFF, an independent third-party public interest group, sought inter partes review (IPR) of a patent owned by NPE, Personal Audio, which sent numerous demand letters and filed more than a dozen suits against small podcasters.  Personal Audio’s patent was found unpatentable by the PTAB, after which they appealed to the Federal Circuit, requesting reversal.  The Federal Circuit, unprompted, asked the parties for briefing on EFF’s standing to defend the appeal.  Unified Patents (joined by Askeladden LLC) submitted an amicus curiae brief. 

The decision and links to other articles about the decision are below.

Hailo patent challenged as likely invalid

On July 31, 2017, Unified, represented by Laurence & Phillips, filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 5,973,619 owned and asserted by Hailo Technologies, LLC, a well-known NPE. The '619 patent, directed to a taxi dispatch and payment system, was first asserted in April 2017 in two district court cases against Uber and Lyft. A week later, the EFF awarded the '619 patent its "Stupid Patent of the Month" award. 

To read the petition and view the entire case proceeding, please see our PTAB Portal.