Jay Mac Rust

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Practice Summary — Jay Mac Rust

Specialty / focus. Rust's tracked patent work is concentrated in a single narrow technology area: networked document imaging and "scan-to-email" software. Through MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC, he asserted a five-patent portfolio — U.S. Patents 6,185,590; 6,771,381; 7,477,410; 7,986,426; and 8,488,173 — covering distributed computer architecture for scanning, storing, and emailing documents. MPHJ's campaign ran on two tracks: mass licensing demand letters to end users of networked multifunction peripherals, and actual infringement suits against equipment makers. The tracked case, MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC v. D-Link Systems, Inc., fits the latter pattern, as does MPHJ's litigation against Ricoh, Xerox, and HP (Canon and Sharp reportedly settled rather than litigate).

Side preference. Exclusively plaintiff/patent-owner side — 1 of 1 tracked appearances, and it is consistent with the full public record. Rust is not a defense-side lawyer for operating companies; he is the principal of the asserting entity itself, which is why his one tracked appearance is coded "in-house." His role was as owner/manager and licensing-campaign decision-maker rather than as trial counsel of record; MPHJ's outside patent firm for the demand-letter program was Farney Daniels, P.C.

Firm context. Rust is described in SEC filings and press coverage as a Texas-licensed attorney who practiced in Stephenville, Texas and later relocated to Waco, where he acquired the Klein patents in 2012 for $1 and built out roughly 100 MPHJ subsidiaries. He was the sole member and manager of MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC, and the FTC consent order (see below) treats him as an MPHJ officer. I did not find a verifiable current firm affiliation or active practice; whether he remains in active practice is not something I can confirm from reliable sources.

Notable matters, PTAB, and regulatory history. The most consequential proceedings involving Rust were not infringement suits but the reverse: the PTAB invalidated the asserted MPHJ claims in IPRs filed by Ricoh, Xerox, and HP, and MPHJ's appeal of those decisions went to the Federal Circuit (MPHJ Tech. Invs. v. Ricoh Ams. Corp., No. 2016-1243 (Fed. Cir.)). I was able to confirm the appeal and the Board's invalidation, but not the ultimate disposition from a primary source in this review. On the regulatory side, the FTC's November 2014 consent order — against MPHJ, Rust, and Farney Daniels — was the agency's first consumer-protection action against a patent assertion entity; it imposed no monetary penalty but barred misleading licensing representations and ran for 20 years, with a separate obligation requiring Rust to notify the FTC of any new PAE-related employment for ten years. Related actions include a January 2014 New York AG settlement, a Vermont AG suit under that state's bad-faith patent assertion statute, and a Nebraska cease-and-desist order. Separately, in May 2016 the SEC charged Rust with Section 10(b)/Rule 10b-5 violations arising from his role as escrow agent for Atlantic Rim Funding; the S.D.N.Y. entered default judgment against him on October 5, 2017, imposing a permanent injunction, $160,706.79 in disgorgement plus $31,076.22 prejudgment interest, and a $160,706.79 civil penalty. Any evaluation of this attorney's patent practice should account for that securities matter, which is a matter of public record.

Bar. Licensed in Texas (per SEC complaint and court filings); education not reliably sourced.

Caveat on the data: the single tracked appearance materially understates Rust's footprint in patent matters, because his enforcement activity ran predominantly through pre-suit demand letters, state/FTC regulatory proceedings, and PTAB/IPR challenges to his own patents — none of which show up as district court patent appearances.