Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary of publicly traded Quest Patent Research Corporation (QPRC), is litigating a cybersecurity campaign against six defendants: Check Point Software, CrowdStrike, Fortinet, Palo Alto Networks, Trellix, and Trend Micro. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) moved all cases in the campaign for pretrial purposes to the Eastern District of Texas, where Judge Rodney Gilstrap has just ruled on multiple motions filed in the earliest three cases. One of those rulings dismissed the declaratory judgment action filed by Palo Alto Networks in the Southern District of New York, for lack of personal jurisdiction over Taasera Licensing and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as to QPRC. That same day, March 15, Taasera Licensing immediately filed an affirmative case over the same nine patents against Palo Alto Networks (2:23-cv-00113) in the Eastern District of Texas, ensuring that that dispute will now remain there through any trial.

Musarubra (d/b/a Trellix) (2:22-cv-00427) is the latest defendant to be added to the litigation campaign that Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary of publicly traded Quest Patent Research Corporation, launched in November 2021 with a suit against Trend Micro. The nine asserted patents are broadly directed to various aspects of cybersecurity, with Trellix accused of infringement through the provision of certain network security software products and services. In August, the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated the campaign in the Eastern District of Texas before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. There, Judge Gilstrap has handed down an order deferring consideration of all Rule 12 motions, of which several are pending, until trial, jury selection for which is set in an initial scheduling order for February 2024.

Last November, Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary of publicly traded Quest Patent Research Corporation (QPRC), filed the first case in its network security campaign, suing Trend Micro in the Eastern District of Texas, where it was assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The plaintiff expanded the campaign in the new year, hitting Check Point Software (also in the Eastern District of Texas) and Palo Alto Networks (which litigation landed before too long in the Southern District of New York). Trend Micro, citing an alleged failure to serve, filed a declaratory judgment action against Taasera Licensing in the Northern District of Texas and moved the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate the campaign in one place, preferably the Northern District of California but alternatively the Southern District of New York. The JPML has spoken, agreeing to centralize the litigation . . . but not to either requested venue.

Check Point Software (2:22-cv-00063) and Palo Alto Networks (2:22-cv-00062) are the latest defendants sued in the cybersecurity campaign of Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary of publicly traded Quest Patent Research Corporation (QPRC). The first and only other defendant, Trend Micro, has also filed a declaratory judgment action in the Northern District of Texas (3:22-cv-00518), citing a missed deadline for Taasera Licensing to serve the complaint that it filed in the Eastern District of Texas late last November.

Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary of publicly traded Quest Patent Research Corporation (QPRC), has launched its first litigation campaign, suing Trend Micro (2:21-cv-00441) in the Eastern District of Texas over a wide range of cybersecurity products. The nine asserted patents were developed by IBM or TaaSera, Inc.—a shuttered network security firm—and are broadly directed to various aspects of network security.

Quest Patent Research Corporation (QPRC) appears to have combined portfolio acquisitions from TaaSera, a shuttered network security firm, and Daedalus Blue LLC, an NPE in receipt of a large assignment of assets from IBM, under a network security umbrella. The publicly traded NPE’s public website lists 29 US patents and two foreign patents as held by Taasera Licensing LLC, a subsidiary that currently available USPTO records have yet to reflect owns patents.