As RPX previously reported, the litigation operation associated with monetization firm Dynamic IP Deals, LLC (d/b/a DynaIP) created persistent confusion in its early days, as it moved from litigation by Illinois entities to litigation through Texas entities. Some of that confusion pervades a recently unsealed order from Western District of Texas Alan D. Albright shifting potentially $600K in attorney fees against plaintiff Silent Communication, LLC and its counsel Ramey LLP in a case filed against BlackBerry, at the same time that Fiserv has asked West Texas Judge David Counts to clear away a cloud now hovering over the ownership of the patent family that AuthWallet, LLC, also repped by Ramey, has been litigating. The named inventor there has filed declarations with the USPTO suggesting that AuthWallet never actually owned that family.

Patent assignments recently made public suggest another direct pickup for a New York-based investment management firm, this time through a familiar pipeline; movement of a search technology portfolio to a Delaware entity; and more patents filling out an apparent divestiture of a networking portfolio previously reported.

Navog LLC has filed three cases so far in 2025: last month, one against each of Garmin (1:25-cv-20787) in the Southern District of Florida and TeleType (1:25-cv-10394) in the District of Massachusetts; and this month, one against Samsara Networks (1:25-cv-00333) in the District of Delaware. The New Mexico plaintiff asserts a single patent generally related to a “GPS and warning system for an automobile” in this campaign, which began by hitting six defendants in May 2024. Vehicle tracking and telematics systems have been targeted.

The litigation campaign of Hyperquery LLC continues its expansion, this past week the plaintiff adding a District of Delaware case against Apple (1:25-cv-00334) to the separate Texas suits that it filed earlier this year against Access Technology Group, Asustor, Atlassian, ByteDance (Pico Immersive), Canva, D2L, Fiserv, GOG, JetBrains, Nemetschek Group, Overwolf, PDD Holdings, Pipedrive, Sage Group, and Sony. The plaintiff asserts a single patent generally related to initiating a download of an application in response to a user’s search query and input, targeting in the new complaint Apple’s Arcade video game subscription service.

Since March 2024, Audio Pod, Inc. subsidiary Audio Pod IP, LLC has filed four Eastern District of Virginia complaints against Amazon and its subsidiaries (i.e., Amazon Web Services, Amazon.com, and Audible). Now, Audible has filed an action against Audio Pod IP (1:25-cv-02158) in the Southern District of New York, seeking a declaratory judgment of noninfringement as to six patents generally related to the online playback of audiobooks, as well as related features like bookmarking and storage allocation.

engajer, Inc. has not only accused Meta Platforms, Microsoft, OpenAI, and Soul Machines (as well as a set of Doe defendants) (9:25-cv-80339) of patent infringement in a single Southern District of Florida complaint, it has also simultaneously moved for summary judgment on its claims. The complaint targets with a single patent—generally related to generating an “Interactive Marketing Presentation” through a user interface of a webpage—the provision of “Al-powered interactive content systems, video-based engagement platforms, and AI chatbot interfaces”. Per the motion, summary judgment is appropriate already because “Defendants’ actions clearly constitute patent infringement”.

The first round of cases filed by TG--2006 Holdings, LLC, in late 2023 into early 2024, having run its course, the plaintiff has filed another, suing Atlassian (2:25-cv-00249) and Monday.com (2:25-cv-00250) in separate Eastern District of Texas complaints, as well as Dropbox (1:25-cv-00297), Marlin Management (d/b/a Marlin Equity Partners) (Arcserve) (1:25-cv-00296), Notion Labs (1:25-cv-00299), OpenDrives (1:25-cv-00300), and Spreadsheet.com (1:25-cv-00309) in the District of Delaware. Prior defendant in this campaign Microsoft filed a motion to dismiss for pleading inadequacies and for unpatentable subject matter, arguing as to the latter that the asserted patent claims against it are ineligibly drawn to the abstract idea of “using a filing system to track and display information on the status of business tasks”.

AR Design Innovations, LLC, a plaintiff associated with Texas monetization firm Empire IP LLC, has filed suit against Target (2:25-cv-00299) in the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff asserts a single patent generally related to a client that retrieves a 3D model from a server and then allows the manipulation and placement of the model within a 3D scene to produce a photorealistic rendered image that includes certain “luminosity characteristics”. Target is accused of infringement through the provision of its mobile app, which supports the “See It in Your Space” augmented reality (AR) tool.

In a new Western District of Texas complaint, SPRIV LLC has accused Salesforce (1:25-cv-00354) of infringing four user authentication patents. SPRIV pleads that it is “a practicing entity that specializes in fraud prevention and provides a platform for multiple two-factor authentication solutions in one product”. It targets the support for multi-factor authentication within Salesforce Authenticator, characterized in the new complaint as “built on a location-based two-factor authentication technology developed by Toopher, a company that Salesforce acquired in April 2015”.

SmartOrder LLC, styling itself as “Smart Order LLC”, has launched litigation over a single patent generally related to optimizing delivery services for customers at a “restaurant, shopping, travel, or entertainment venue”. The defendants so far are Bloomin’ Brands (Carrabba’s Italian Grill) (7:25-cv-00115) in the Western District of Texas and Dine Brands Global (Applebee’s Services) (2:25-cv-00280), Panera Bread (2:25-cv-00282), Target (2:25-cv-00283), The Cheesecake Factory (2:25-cv-00285), and Wendy’s (2:25-cv-00286) in the Eastern District of Texas. Targeted is the provision of the defendants’ respective mobile ordering, pickup, and curbside to-go services.