Delaware plaintiff Honeyman Cipher Solutions LLC has expanded the litigation campaign that it launched in June with a single suit against Groupon, targeting that company’s use of Apple’s iTunes Connect and Google’s Android Developer Console to register and distribute its respective iOS and Android apps. Now, as Groupon challenges the sufficiency of Honeyman Cipher’s infringement allegations in that Northern District of Illinois case, the NPE has filed a pair of new complaints in Delaware against LogMeIn (1:19-cv-01545) and Snap (1:19-cv-01547) over their use of the same systems—laying out virtually the same arguments currently under fire by Groupon. A related set of arguments were also raised by Groupon in an unresolved motion to dismiss a Texas case brought by the patent-in-campaign’s prior owner, Bradley D. Liddle’s Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC (PET), before that case was dismissed for improper venue (thereby mooting the defendant’s allegations of noninfringement).

As predicted, Honeyman Cipher Solutions LLC has launched its first litigation campaign, asserting one of the patents previously litigated by Bradley D. Liddle’s Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC (PET). The new Northern District of Illinois complaint asserts a patent generally related to digital content protection in computer systems against Groupon (1:19-cv-03754) for a second time, again targeting the company over its use of Apple’s iTunes Connect and Google’s Android Developer Console to register and distribute its iOS and Android apps, respectively. In June 2017, a suit over the same patent, filed by PET in the Eastern District of Texas, was dismissed for improper venue a few months after the US Supreme Court’s TC Heartland decision.

Multiple Delaware NPEs under the same apparent control have each taken over the litigation of patents—earlier passed to a Texas entity for assertion—after the patents have boomeranged back. Most recently, Circuit Ventures LLC assigned a family of circuit monitoring patents to Texas entity Wireless Monitoring Systems LLC, which asserted them in litigation from November 2016 to January 2019 before assigning the family back. Circuit Ventures has sued NXP Semiconductors (6:19-cv-00275) and Pepprl + Fuchs (4:19-cv-01515) in April 2019 and Honeywell (1:19-cv-00857), Link Interactive (1:19-cv-00856), and Scout Security (1:19-cv-00858) so far in May. Likewise, Universal Cipher LLC assigned a single patent generally related to “dynamic” text generation to Cumberland Systems, LLC, which asserted it in litigation from May 2017 to May 2018 before returning the patent to Universal Cipher, which has now sued Best Buy (2:19-cv-00160), Target (2:19-cv-00163), and Wal-Mart (2:19-cv-00164) over it. These reversals, as well as other assignment activity, suggest a return to Delaware for these and other NPEs affiliated with the same patent attorney, perhaps motivated by a recent Federal Circuit opinion clarifying that targets of letter-writing campaigns can seek declaratory judgments in their home districts, rather than risk being sued elsewhere.

Codec Technologies LLC has filed ten new suits in its sole litigation campaign against Craig Electronics (2:16-cv-01426), Curtis (2:16-cv-01436), Datawind (2:16-cv-01437), Global Phoenix Computer Technologies Solutions (2:16-cv-01432), Naxa Electronics (2:16-cv-01428), Pivos Technology Group (2:16-cv-01427), PLR IP Holdings (2:16-cv-01435), RSPA (d/b/a Sungale) (2:16-cv-01429), Voxx Electronics (2:16-cv-01430), and Vulcan Electronics (2:16-cv-01431). The new complaints allege that tablets made and sold by each defendant infringe a single patent (6,825,780) generally related to data compression using multiple encoders on a single integrated circuit.

Recently formed Texas NPE Paluxy Messaging, LLC has initiated a first litigation campaign with new cases filed against 8×8 (6:16-cv-01346), Longview Cable Television (6:16-cv-01345), Nextiva (6:16-cv-01348), and ShoreTel (6:16-cv-01350). Paluxy asserts a single patent (8,411,829) generally related to a messaging system that separately transmits copies of recorded messages. The NPE accuses the defendants of infringement through provision of their voicemail services. The ‘829 patent has five named inventors, one of whom, James D. Logan, is a prolific inventor whose patents have been the subject of high-profile past litigation, including the long-running Personal Audio LLC campaign. Public filings in connection with an appeal to the New Hampshire Supreme Court from Logan’s divorce decree indicate that his now second ex-wife, Caren, has been awarded, through a separate patent stipulation, a percentage interest in Logan’s patent holdings through the companies that own them.

Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC (PET) has continued the expansion of its sole litigation campaign beyond mobile banking to more general consumer apps with new cases against Groupon (2:16-cv-01093), JCPenney (2:16-cv-01073), IAC (Match.com) (2:16-cv-01094), and State Farm (2:16-cv-01072). These complaints assert the same two patents (5,991,399; 5,974,550) consistently at issue since the onset of this campaign in June 2015. A July 2016 claim construction order characterizes the ‘399 patent as generally related to “digital content protection in computer systems”, and the ‘550 patent as generally related to a “remote security protocol in computer systems in which two processes are operating”.

Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC (PET) has recently added cases against Alkami (2:16-cv-01032), Best Buy (2:16-cv-01049), Etsy (2:16-cv-01050), and Shutterfly (2:16-cv-01053) to its sole litigation campaign. The new complaints assert two patents (5,991,399; 5,974,550) generally related to security in online transactions, targeting the defendants’ mobile apps. At roughly the same time, the court granted dismissals, all but one with prejudice, in earlier cases in the campaign, all of which were brought against banks or providers of online and mobile banking applications.

In the wake of the dismissal of a Delaware declaratory judgment action, Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC (PET) has added an affirmative case against Fidelity National Information Services (FNIS) (2:16-cv-00803) to its litigation campaign. One day earlier, it filed suit against another banking software solutions provider, Q2 Holdings (2:16-cv-00791), with each case asserting two patents (5,991,399; 5,974,550) generally related to security in online transactions. Online and mobile banking services are at issue in the campaign, which, with the Delaware dismissal, is now based entirely in Texas.

In June and July 2015, Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC filed separate lawsuits against three banks located in the Eastern District of Texas: American Bank of Texas (2:15-cv-01273), Citizens National Bank (2:15-cv-01168), and Independent Bank (2:15-cv-01382). Throughout that same time period, according to subsequently filed declaratory judgment actions, Plano Encryption sent letters to multiple banks alleging infringement by the companies’ online and mobile banking applications of several patents purportedly owned by Plano Encryption. Each of the three Texas complaints asserts two patents (5,991,399; 5,974,550) from among the six mentioned in the NPE’s letters against the applications of the defendant banks. The patents generally relate to security in online transactions.