Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, Case No. 2:25-cv-00534, is ongoing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff is Atlas Global Technologies LLC, a patent assertion entity (PAE) and a subsidiary of the publicly traded Acacia Research Corporation. The defendant is Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE), a multinational enterprise information technology company that offers servers, storage, networking, converged systems, software, services, and cloud solutions.

The litigation asserts U.S. Patent No. 10,348,471, among others. This patent generally relates to memory module architecture and data buffering technology, which is critical for high-performance memory modules used in enterprise servers and data centers. The accused products are certain Wi-Fi 6-compliant devices offered by HPE.

The case is being heard in the Eastern District of Texas by Judge Rodney Gilstrap. This venue is historically significant for patent litigation due to its reputation for plaintiff-friendly procedural rules, accelerated trial schedules, and a high success rate for patent owners. While the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision aimed to restrict patent venue, plaintiffs have employed strategies, such as suing foreign affiliates, to maintain venue in the EDTX. The case is notable as part of Acacia Research's broader strategy of asserting a portfolio of patents, including those acquired from NEWRACOM, against companies providing Wi-Fi 6-compliant devices. The ongoing nature of this litigation highlights the active landscape of patent enforcement by NPEs in the high-tech memory and wireless communication sectors.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company

Case: Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Case number: 2:25-cv-00534
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Status: Active
Patents at issue: 10348471

The patent infringement litigation, Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Case No. 2:25-cv-00534, was filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The patent at issue in this case is U.S. Patent No. 10348471.

As of June 1, 2026, the case is active, and detailed docket information beyond initial filing records is not readily available through public web searches without direct PACER access. The provided search results offer a high-level overview of the case identification but do not delve into granular docket entries for specific motions, claim construction, discovery, or trial events.

Chronological Summary of Legal Developments:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Complaint Filed: The case was filed on May 16, 2025, by Plaintiff Atlas Global Technologies LLC against Defendant Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company in the Eastern District of Texas. Further details regarding the specific allegations in the complaint, or the filing of an answer and counterclaims, are not publicly available through the performed searches.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • Information on specific pre-trial motions such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay pending IPR, or any rulings thereon, is not publicly available from the conducted searches. Given the case's filing date of May 2025, it is likely that initial procedural motions have occurred or are underway.

• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

  • No information regarding a Markman hearing or claim construction order is publicly available. Given the case's age (just over one year since filing), it may not have reached this stage yet, or the orders are not publicly indexed in the searched databases.

• Discovery Milestones:

  • No specific discovery milestones or disputes with strategic significance are publicly available from the conducted searches.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-trial Motions:

  • The case is still active and has not reached trial, verdict, or post-trial motions as of the current date.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:

  • The case is currently active and no final disposition (settlement, dismissal, or judgment) has been publicly reported.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • A search for U.S. Patent No. 10348471 in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) databases (P-TACTS and Decisions) did not yield any currently instituted or concluded IPR or PGR proceedings for this specific patent. Therefore, there is no known effect of parallel PTAB proceedings on this litigation at this time.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company 2:25-cv-00534 plaintiff counsel", "Atlas Global Technologies LLC counsel", "Acacia Research Corporation patent litigation counsel", "Jeffrey T. Castellano patent litigation experience", "Scott Arthur Breedlove patent litigation experience", "Demetrios Anaipakos patent litigation experience", "Amir Alavi patent litigation experience", "Jamie Aycock patent litigation experience"]))
thought
The user is asking to identify the plaintiff's counsel in the case Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, case number 2:25-cv-00534, in the Eastern District of Texas. I need to find the names of the attorneys representing Atlas Global Technologies LLC, their roles, firms, office locations, and relevant patent litigation experience. I will use web search, prioritizing docket information, firm websites, and legal news sources.

Based on the previous sections, the plaintiff is Atlas Global Technologies LLC, a subsidiary of Acacia Research Corporation. This information might be useful if direct counsel information for Atlas Global Technologies LLC is scarce.

I will formulate search queries to find this information.The counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s), Atlas Global Technologies LLC, in Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Case No. 2:25-cv-00534, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, could not be definitively identified from the provided search results for this specific case. Docket summaries for this case, such as those from PacerMonitor and Justia, primarily listed attorneys for the defendant, Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, but did not explicitly name plaintiff's counsel.

However, based on the plaintiff's identity as a patent assertion entity (PAE) and a subsidiary of Acacia Research Corporation, and considering the venue of the Eastern District of Texas, it is highly probable that Atlas Global Technologies LLC has engaged experienced patent litigation firms known for representing plaintiffs in such matters. Firms and attorneys frequently involved in plaintiff-side patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas include:

• Alavi Anaipakos

  • Attorneys often involved:
    • Amir Alavi (Partner, Co-founder)
      • Firm & Location: Alavi Anaipakos, Houston, Texas.
      • Experience: Mr. Alavi is a prominent trial lawyer focusing on complex commercial and intellectual property litigation. He is described as an "unflappable advocate" and a "judicious strategist" in patent cases, with a strong track record of securing significant verdicts for patent owners, including a $15.7 million patent infringement verdict for Rembrandt Wireless and a $391 million patent infringement verdict for Versata Software. He is Board Certified in Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.
    • Demetrios Anaipakos (Partner, Co-founder)
      • Firm & Location: Alavi Anaipakos, Houston, Texas.
      • Experience: Mr. Anaipakos is widely recognized as a top civil trial lawyer with nearly three decades of experience in patent and complex commercial litigation, representing both plaintiffs and defendants. He has helped clients obtain and collect large patent judgments and has won jury trials against major technology companies. He is Board Certified in Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.

• Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC

  • Attorneys often involved:
    • T. John "Johnny" Ward, Jr. (Of Counsel)
      • Firm & Location: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas.
      • Experience: A former U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Texas, Judge Ward presided over a significant number of intellectual property cases and jury trials. His current practice focuses on patent and complex commercial cases.
    • Wesley Hill (Partner)
      • Firm & Location: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas.
      • Experience: Recognized for intellectual property litigation, frequently assisting in complex cases before Texas juries.
    • Andrea Fair (Trial Lawyer)
      • Firm & Location: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas.
      • Experience: Recognized for excellence in intellectual property litigation, with recent jury verdicts including $847 million and $122 million in patent infringement cases.

• Carter Arnett PLLC

  • Attorneys often involved:
    • Scott W. Breedlove (Partner)
      • Firm & Location: Carter Arnett PLLC, Dallas, Texas.
      • Experience: A registered patent attorney with an electrical engineering background, Mr. Breedlove is a trial lawyer who has successfully represented patent owners, securing over $50 million in payments and winning jury verdicts in patent infringement trials. He has practiced intellectual property for over 20 years.

• Yetter Coleman LLP

  • Attorneys often involved:
    • Jamie A. Aycock (Business Trial Lawyer)
      • Firm & Location: Yetter Coleman LLP, Houston, Texas.
      • Experience: Mr. Aycock is a business trial lawyer with experience prosecuting patent infringement lawsuits, including cases that resulted in multi-million dollar verdicts for clients related to Bluetooth EDR and HD Voice™ technologies.

• CASTELLANO PLLC

  • Attorneys often involved:
    • Jeffrey T. Castellano (Lead Counsel/Managing Owner)
      • Firm & Location: CASTELLANO PLLC, Washington, D.C.
      • Experience: Mr. Castellano has litigated patent cases as lead counsel for over 15 years in various U.S. District Courts, including the Eastern District of Texas, as well as the Federal Circuit and the International Trade Commission. His firm focuses on patent, trademark, and trade secret litigation.

While these attorneys and firms have extensive experience representing plaintiffs in patent infringement cases, including in the Eastern District of Texas, the provided search results did not contain a specific docket entry or filing that directly identified the counsel of record for Atlas Global Technologies LLC in this particular case (2:25-cv-00534).

The following attorneys have appeared on behalf of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE) in Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Case No. 2:25-cv-00534, in the Eastern District of Texas:

Lead Counsel / Firm Counsel:

• Robert N. Kang
  • Firm: Winston & Strawn LLP.
  • Mr. Kang is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company in this case. Winston & Strawn has a notable intellectual property practice, frequently representing technology companies in patent litigation.
• Edward R. Nelson, III
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC, Fort Worth, TX.
  • Mr. Nelson is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. His firm, Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC, is known for its patent litigation work, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas.
• Carder W. Brooks
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC, Fort Worth, TX.
  • Mr. Brooks is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
• Christopher G. Granaghan
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC, Fort Worth, TX.
  • Mr. Granaghan is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
• Jinming Zhang
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC.
  • Mr. Zhang is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
• Janson Westmoreland
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC.
  • Mr. Westmoreland is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.

Local Counsel:

• Jennifer Haltom Doan
  • Firm: Haltom & Doan.
  • Ms. Doan is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. Haltom & Doan is a prominent local counsel firm in the Eastern District of Texas for patent litigation.
• Joshua Reed Thane
  • Firm: Haltom & Doan.
  • Mr. Thane is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
• Haleigh Ann Hashem
  • Firm: Haltom & Doan.
  • Ms. Hashem is listed as counsel for Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.

In-House Counsel (General IP Litigation Roles at HPE - specific appearance in this case not confirmed by search results but likely involved in strategy and outside counsel management):

While specific docket entries confirming their individual appearances in this particular case were not explicitly found in the provided search snippets, the following individuals hold significant in-house IP litigation roles at Hewlett Packard Enterprise and would likely be involved in managing the defense strategy:

• Brett Alten
  • Role: Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, and Chief Intellectual Property Counsel at Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
  • Mr. Alten is responsible for all aspects of HPE's intellectual property strategy, including patent portfolio development, monetization, and litigation. He has prior experience at Tesla, Dropbox, and Apple, as well as firms like Morrison & Foerster LLP and Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP.
• Grant Ritz
  • Role: Director and AGC for IP Transactions at Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
  • Mr. Ritz manages a team of patent attorneys supporting IP-intensive transactions and has held various roles at HP/HPE involving patent development, transactions, disputes, and IP litigation.
• Angela Johnson
  • Role: IP Litigation Counsel at Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
  • Ms. Johnson focuses on patent litigation and collaborates with joint defense groups.
• Abigail Yull
  • Role: Litigation Counsel (New Attorney Program Class of 2018) at Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
  • Ms. Yull works on a variety of matters, including patent disputes.