<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"<strong>Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas</strong><br /><em>Feb. 1</em><br /><br /><li>Worth Home Products LP vs. Litex Industries Ltd.<br /><br />Worth Home Products, a Texas limited partnership based in Houston, claims it is the developer and distributor of innovative home products including the Instant Pendant Light. <br /><br />The product is a recessed light conversion kit that allows easy conversion of a recessed lighting fixture into a hanging pendant light and Worth Home claims it is protected under U.S. Patent No. 7,311,425 issued Dec. 25, 2007.<br /><br />Worth Home alleges that Litex Industries, a Texas limited partnership based in Grand Prairie, is infringing on the '425 Patent through the manufacture and sales of its Portfolio Recessed Light Conversion Kit.<br /><br />The plaintiff is seeking damages adequate to compensate for the infringement and that the damages be trebled as a result of Litex's willful and deliberate acts. Worth Home is also asking that Litex account for all gains, profits and/or advantages derived from infringement and deliver all infringing products for destruction. The plaintiff seeks interest, costs and attorneys' fees. <br /><br />Gerald Conley and Tonya Gray of Andrews Kurth LP in Dallas are representing the plaintiff.<br /><br />The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Charles Everingham.<br /><br />2:08-cv-037-TJW-CE<br /><br /><em>Feb. 4</em><br /><br /><li>Electronic  Data Systems Corp. vs. Online Wireless Inc.<br /><br />Electronic Data Systems of Plano claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent Nos. 7,156,300 and 7,255,268 which generally relate to a system and method for electronic purchase of prepaid telephone services. <br /><br />The plaintiff's original complaint describes the inventions whereby a customer can purchase a specified amount of telephone service through a personal computer or an ATM machine.<br /><br />According to the complaint, EDS was founded in 1962 and has grown to deliver a broad portfolio of information technology and business process outsources services to clients in the manufacturing, financial services, healthcare, communications, energy, transportation, consumer and retail industries and to governments around the world.<br /><br />EDS alleges that Online Wireless Inc., doing business as Page Plus Cellular, conducts prepaid wireless business that infringe the patents. <br /><br />The plaintiff is asking for a court injunction against Page Plus and award of damages adequate to compensate for the infringement along with interest and costs.  EDS is requesting that the amount of compensatory damages be increased three times. <br /><br />Hilda Gavan of Jones Day in Dallas is lead attorney for the plaintiff.<br /><br />The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Charles Everingham.<br /><br />Case No. 2:08-cv-041-TJW-CE<br /><br /><em>Feb. 5</em><br /><br /><li>360 Electrical LLC vs. Gottrox LLC<br /><br />360 Electrical claims it holds the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,196,851 issued March 6, 2001, for a Reorientable Electrical Outlet. <br /><br />The plaintiff alleges that Gottrox is infringing the '851 Patent through the \"Rotator\" product. The original complaint states that Gottrox has an established distribution channel for its products in retail outlets including Lazar's Juvenile Furniture, Herrington, Taylor Gifts, Harbor Freight Tools and Walgreens. <br /><br />360 Electrical claims that prior to filing the case, it gave Gottrox actual notice of its infringement. <br /><br />\"Plaintiff 360 Electrical is entitled to recover from Gottrox the damages suffered &Atilde;&macr;&Acirc;&iquest;&Acirc;&frac12; as a result of Gottrox's unlawful acts, or at least a reasonable royalty for Gottrox's use of the patented invention,\" the complaint states.<br /><br />The plaintiff is also seeking treble damages, attorneys' fees, expenses, costs and interest.<br /><br />Steven Lauff of Fish & Richardson PC in Austin is lead attorney for the plaintiff. The Spangler Law firm in Marshall is also working for the plaintiff.<br /><br />The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward.<br /><br />Case No. 2:08-CV-044-TJW<br /><br /><li>Parallel Networks LLC vs. Priceline.com Inc. et al<br /><br />Plaintiff Parallel Networks is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Dallas.<br /><br />U.S. Patent Nos. 5,894,554 and 6,415,335 B1 were issued for systems and methods for managing dynamic Web page generation requests. Parallel Networks claims it is the owner of the '554 and '335 Patents.<br /><br />The complaint alleges that defendants Priceline.com, Orbitz, Walgreens, OfficeMax, Shutterfly, Saks and Clark Wamberg have infringed Parallel Networks' patents.<br /><br />The plaintiff is seeking the full amount of its actual damages, interest, costs, fees and increased damages for willful infringement.<br /><br />Larry Carlson of Baker Botts in Dallas is lead attorney for the plaintiff. <br /><br />The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge David Folsom and referred to Magistrate Charles Everingham.<br /><br />Case No. 2:08-cv-045-DF-CE<br /><br /><li>Andrew Katrinecz and David Byrd vs. Zippy Technology Corp. and Zippy USA Inc.<br /><br />Plaintiffs Andrew Katrinecz of Shalimar, Fla., and David Byrd of Round Rock, Texas, claim that together they own all rights to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,199,996 and 7,284,872. The patents were issued for a low power, low cost illuminated keyboards and keypads. <br /><br />The plaintiffs allege that Zippy Technology of Taiwan and Zippy USA of California have infringed the '996 and '872 Patents. <br /><br />In addition to the patent infringement complaint, plaintiffs are alleging copyright infringement over promotional writings about the invention.<br /><br />According to the complaint, plaintiffs wrote \"Have you ever used your computer at night or in low-lit environments? &Atilde;&macr;&Acirc;&iquest;&Acirc;&frac12; If so you know how troublesome overhead lighting can be when you are tired &Atilde;&macr;&Acirc;&iquest;&Acirc;&frac12; For years people have been faced with this problem, until now. We have the solution &Atilde;&macr;&Acirc;&iquest;&Acirc;&frac12;\"<br /><br />The complaint alleges that Zippy \"copied verbatim this descriptive work of Plaintiffs Andrew Katrinecz and David Byrd and published on its Web site, using verbatim language.\"<br /><br />Plaintiffs allege that Zippy has knowingly and intentionally copied the information in furtherance of their business. <br /><br />The plaintiffs are seeking damages, treble damages, interest, fees and costs for patent infringement. For the copyright infringement, the plaintiffs are seeking treble damages, profits, fees, expenses and other relief.<br /><br />David Dunham of Taylor, Dunham & Burgess LLP in Austin is representing the plaintiffs.<br /><br />The court document did not indicate to which judge the case has been assigned.<br /><br /> Case No. 2:08-cv-048<br /><br /><strong>Texarkana Division, Eastern District of Texas</strong><br /><em>Jan. 31</em><br /><br /><li>ESN LLC vs. Cisco Sytems Inc. and Cisco-Linksys LLC<br /><br />Plaintiff ESN is a limited liability company co-founded by Gregory D. Girard, inventor of the patent-in-suit. <br /><br />On Oct. 16, 2007, U.S. Patent No. 7,283,519 was issued for a Distributed Edge Switching System for Voice-Over-Packet Multiservice Network to Girard. The '519 Patent was assigned to ESN.<br /><br />The plaintiff alleges that Cisco infringes the '519 Patent through products including Cisco Integrated Services Routers, the Cisco Unified Communications 500 Series, the Linksys SPA-9000 and LinksysOne SVR-3000.<br /><br />ESN claims that Cisco had actual notice of the patent application at least as early as Aug. 11, 2006. ESN also claims it provided specific notice in writing of certain infringing activities of Cisco and Cisco-Linksys at least as early as June 8, 2007, through their outside counsel. <br /><br />\"By reason of the acts alleged herein, ESN has suffered, is suffering and unless restrained by the court, will continue to suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law,\" the original complaint states.<br /><br />The plaintiff is asking the court to award damages for infringement with interest, costs, attorney fees and other relief deemed just and proper.<br /><br />Eric Albritton of the Albritton Law Firm is lead attorney for the plaintiff.<br /><br />The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge David Folsom.<br /><br />Case No. 5:08-cv-020-DF<br />"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://setexasrecord.com/stories/510608971-recent-patent-copyright-infringement-cases-filed-in-u-s-district-courts>