Evidence of IP Edge LLC’s frequent practice of naming individuals—seemingly with no discernible connections to patent monetization—as managers or managing members of its various LLCs has long been reported by RPX. Now, with Amazon having recently brought that practice to the attention of Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly, and with a raft of amended disclosures filed on the same day last week by a handful of apparent IP Edge plaintiffs litigating before that same judge, the coming months may see the full extent of that setup, and its bearing on standing, come to light.

In June 2018, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) saw petitioners wage validity challenges against a variety of prominent NPEs. Among those hit by petitions for AIA review in June was Intellectual Ventures LLC (IV), which has not filed any new litigation in the US since October 2017, but continues to assert patents overseas; and NPEs affiliated with Fortress Investment Group LLC and Industrial Technology Research Institute. Also in June, the PTAB instituted trial for two IPRs against affiliates of top litigant IP Edge LLC, which remains the most prolific patent plaintiff of the past 18 years by the number of defendants added to US patent suits. In addition, the Board issued final decisions in IPRs against IV, the California Institute of Technology, inventor Daniel L. Flamm, and frequent litigants Realtime Data LLC and Uniloc Corporation Pty. Limited.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) remained at the center of a heated public debate over the issue of tribal sovereign immunity in December 2017. Motions to dismiss filed by the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe in IPRs against several Allergan patents—acquired by the tribe and licensed back to their original owner to shield them through sovereign immunity—remain pending as the PTAB considers a wave of amicus briefs filed on both sides of the issue. The Board has since denied the tribe’s motion for an oral hearing on discovery related to alleged bias held by the USPTO and its leadership, and that bias’s effect on the selection of judges for the tribe’s case. Meanwhile, among the petitions for inter partes review (IPR) filed in December was one brought by Apple against MEC Resources, LLC, an entity owned by another Native American tribe, which took over an existing lawsuit asserting the challenged patent against Apple in the fall. Also in December, the Board issued institution decisions in petitions against Iridescent Networks, Inc.; Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC; and publicly traded Quarterhill Inc.; while an IPR against Packet Intelligence LLC ended in an adverse judgment after petitioner Sandvine prevailed in a November trial.

Deshodax LLC has added three more defendants to the Delaware leg of its litigation campaign over a single patent (7,307,398), generally related to changing the operation of a “motor system” based on inputs received in an image processor. Earlier complaints in the campaign target the autofocus features in cameras built into smartphone cameras, but these new complaints take aim at the vibrate mode in BlackBerry’s DTE K50 (1:17-cv-01014), Samsung’s Galaxy S7 (1:17-cv-01015), and Sony’s Xperia M5 (1:17-cv-01016) smartphones. Deshodax began this campaign, as had nearly every litigating affiliate of patent monetization firm IP Edge LLC, in the Eastern District of Texas, but shifted to Delaware after the US Supreme Court’s May 22 TC Heartland decision on patent venue.

Another of IP Edge LLC’s litigation campaigns has stretched beyond the Eastern District of Texas. Deshodax LLC has moved for voluntary dismissal of its case against Lenovo (5:17-cv-00081) in that district, at roughly the same time that it has filed a new complaint against the same defendant (1:17-cv-00804) in Delaware, the state of incorporation of the named party, Lenovo (United States), Inc. Both Deshodax complaints assert a single patent (7,307,398) generally related to changing the operation of a “motor system” based on inputs received in an image processor. The accused products are the autofocus features in cameras built into the defendants’ smartphones. IP Edge, long a plaintiff fixture in Texas, has been forced by the US Supreme Court’s TC Heartland decision, to litigate in more varied climates over the past six weeks.

RPX took notice, among the USPTO assignment records made available during the latter half of May, of the transfer of patents from operating companies HP Enterprise, Panasonic, and Qisda to various NPEs. Two of those NPEs (Uniloc Luxembourg S.A. and Deshodax LLC) have already launched campaigns asserting some of the transacted patents. RPX also saw during this time the recordation of assignments to Brian Yates; Fortress Investment Group LLC; Intellectual Ventures LLC; Blackbird Tech LLC; and IP Bridge, Inc., among others.

Deshodax LLC, another apparent affiliate of Texas patent monetization firm IP Edge LLC, has kicked off a litigation campaign, filing individual lawsuits against Acer (5:17-cv-00079), Huawei (5:17-cv-00080), Lenovo (5:17-cv-00081), Nokia (5:17-cv-00082), OnePlus (5:17-cv-00083), TCL Communications (5:17-cv-00084), and ZTE (5:17-cv-00085). The new complaints assert a single patent (7,307,398) generally related to changing the operation of a “motor system” based on inputs received in an image processor. The accused products are the autofocus features in cameras built into the defendants’ smartphones.