In the wake of the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision in In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 545 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2008), and the Federal Circuit’s decision in In re TS Tech USA Corp., 551 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2008), both of which granted mandamus petitions to correct the erroneous denial of transfer motions by district courts, we have noticed an uptick in the amount of patent infringement cases being filed in the Northern District of Texas. For example, in the last week or so, we’ve seen at least four new cases filed:
- On May 27, 2011, PJC Logistics sued over ten companies in the Northern District of Texas, alleging infringement of US Patent No. 5,223,844, which claims technology relating to vehicle tracking and security. PJC Logistics is represented by R. Mark Dietz, of the law firm of Dietz & Jarrard, P.C. The case is pending before Judge Boyle. A copy of the complaint is here.
- Also on May 27, 2011, ICON Internet Competence Network B.V. filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against Travelocity.com. ICON claims that Travelocity infringes US Patent No. 6,002,853, which claims technology relating to database searches. Attorneys with Matthews, Lawson & Johnson, PLLC; Provost Umphrey LLP, and Moore Landrey, LLP represent ICON. The case is before Judge O’Connor. A copy of the complaint is here.
- On June 2, 2011, Select Retrieval filed suit against ten defendants—including Gamestop, J.C. Penney, and RadioShack—alleging infringement of US Patent Nos. 5,953,724 and 6,128,617, which claim technology relating to computer software databases and data display software, respectively. The case is before Chief Judge Fitzwater, and R. Mark Dietz, of the law firm of Dietz & Jarrard, P.C., represents Select Retrieval. A copy of the complaint is here.
- Also on June 2, 2011, CodePro Innovations sued Blockbuster, Kohl’s, J.C. Penney, and Redbox in the Northern District of Texas. The patents in suit, US Patent Nos. 5,924,078 and 5,717,866 relate to a promotional code point-of-sale discounting system and comparative analysis of consumer responses to product promotions, respectively. The case is before Judge Solis, and R. Mark Dietz, of the law firm of Dietz & Jarrard, P.C., represents CodePro Innovations. A copy of the complaint is here.