Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, case number 2:25-cv-00582, is currently underway in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiffs are Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe, who initially filed suit against Wybotics, Co. Ltd., for patent infringement. Subsequently, Wybotics Inc. and Wybotics, Co. Ltd. initiated a declaratory judgment action against Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe, seeking declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of the asserted patents. Both Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Wybotics are involved in the pool products industry, with Zodiac being a known operating company in pool systems and care. This suggests a dispute between competitors in the aquatic robotics or pool maintenance technology sector.

The primary patent at issue is US Patent 11,003,191. A technical sketch of this patent relates to a "Control device and method for automatic pool cleaning". Specifically, the patent describes systems and methods for automatic pool cleaners, focusing on aspects of their control and operation within a pool environment. While not explicitly stated in the provided search results, the nature of the parties' businesses and the patent title strongly suggest the accused products are automatic pool cleaning devices or related control systems.

The case is proceeding in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically known for its plaintiff-friendly reputation in patent litigation, often referred to as a "rocket docket" for its expedited case adjudication. Judge J. Rodney Gilstrap, commonly identified by the "JRG" in the case number (2:25-cv-00582-JRG-RSP), is a prominent judge in this district known for handling a significant number of patent cases. While the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision in 2017 aimed to limit forum shopping by restricting venue to where a defendant resides (state of incorporation) or has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business, the Eastern District of Texas has since adapted, and Judge Gilstrap has provided guidance on interpreting the "regular and established place of business" requirement. This case appears to be a direct competitor lawsuit rather than an NPE assertion, which can impact venue considerations under the post-TC Heartland landscape. The case is notable as it represents ongoing patent disputes between direct competitors in the evolving market of automated pool technology. There is no explicit information from the provided searches regarding parallel PTAB IPRs for patent 11,003,191, but such proceedings are common in patent litigation.

The patent infringement litigation concerning U.S. Patent 11003191, titled Zodiac Pool Systems LLC et al v. Wybotics, Co. Ltd. f/k/a Tianjin Wangyuan Environmental Protection and Technology Co., Ltd. (Case No. 2:25-cv-00582), was filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The case is currently active, with a related declaratory judgment action in the Central District of California having been stayed in its favor.

Here's a chronological overview of the key legal developments:

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• May 23, 2025: Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe (Plaintiffs) filed the initial complaint against Wybotics, Co. Ltd. f/k/a Tianjin Wangyuan Environmental Protection and Technology Co., Ltd. (Defendant) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, assigned to Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The initial complaint asserted infringement of other patents.
• September 22, 2025: Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, adding U.S. Patent 11,003,191, along with U.S. Patents 11,880,207 and 11,262,766, to the asserted patents in the case.

Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• Later than August 2025 (Exact Date Not Found): Wybotics Inc. and Wybotics, Co. Ltd. filed a separate declaratory judgment action against Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:25-cv-08526).
• December 3, 2025: In the Central District of California case (2:25-cv-08526), a motion to dismiss, transfer, or stay the declaratory judgment action was considered. The California court granted the motion to the extent it sought a stay, effectively staying the California case pending resolution of the earlier-filed Eastern District of Texas infringement action (2:25-cv-00582). The court ordered the parties to file joint status reports every 120 days. This ruling established the Eastern District of Texas case as the primary venue for the dispute.

Further Developments and Outcome:
As of the current date (May 29, 2026), publicly available information indicates the Eastern District of Texas case (2:25-cv-00582) is active. The docket does not yet reflect outcomes for claim construction (Markman), discovery milestones, trial events, verdict, or final disposition such as settlement, dismissal, or judgment.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:
A search for Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings related to U.S. Patent 11,003,191 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) does not yield any instituted or concluded proceedings. Therefore, there have been no PTAB proceedings affecting this litigation to date.

Based on available docket information and attorney profiles, the plaintiff(s), Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe, in the patent infringement case 2:25-cv-00582 in the Texas Eastern District Court are represented by counsel from Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP and Gillam & Smith, LLP. Steven David Moore, previously associated with Kilpatrick Townsend, is now a partner at Vinson & Elkins LLP and may also be involved.

Here is a breakdown of the identified counsel:

From Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP:

• Christopher Samuel Leah
  • Role: Attorney.
  • Firm & Office: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Atlanta, GA.
  • Experience Note: His USPTO registration data shows his affiliation with Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, updated as of April 5, 2026.
• Kathleen Geyer
  • Role: Associate.
  • Firm & Office: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Seattle, WA.
  • Experience Note: Focuses her practice on patent litigation matters in federal district courts and the International Trade Commission (ITC). She has experience in all aspects of litigation, including claim construction, discovery, and trial phases, and also handles post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). She was recognized as a Washington "Rising Star" for Intellectual Property Litigation from 2023-2025 by Super Lawyers magazine.
• Kevin M. Bell
  • Role: Partner.
  • Firm & Office: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Denver, CO.
  • Experience Note: An intellectual property litigator, Kevin Bell focuses on patent litigation, trademark litigation, and complex business litigation across various fields including electronics, semiconductors, and telecommunications. He has extensive experience in federal district court litigation and ITC investigations. He has explicitly represented Zodiac Pool Systems LLC and Zodiac Pool Care Europe in a patent infringement and importation investigation at the ITC with a related action in the Central District of California, successfully stopping infringement before trial. He was recognized as one of the "Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch" for Intellectual Property Litigation from 2022-2025.
• Andrew D. Evans
  • Role: Associate.
  • Firm & Office: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Atlanta, GA.
  • Experience Note: Member of the patent litigation team, focusing on matters in Federal District Court, the PTAB, and the ITC, across technology areas like telecommunications, computer systems, and mechanical systems. He has trial experience from law school mock trials and has a background in physics.

From Gillam & Smith, LLP:

• Melissa Richards Smith
  • Role: Partner, likely serving as local counsel given her extensive experience in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Firm & Office: Gillam & Smith, LLP, Marshall, TX.
  • Experience Note: Melissa Richards Smith is a seasoned trial lawyer who litigates in the state and federal courts of the Eastern District of Texas for both plaintiffs and defendants. She has had numerous verdicts listed as Verdict Search's Top Texas Verdicts and was inducted into the Texas Lawyer's Texas Verdicts Hall of Fame in 2013. She has tried multiple patent cases to verdict and has served as local counsel for visiting lawyers in over three thousand patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas. She has been named a Texas Superlawyer every year since 2008.

Potentially from Vinson & Elkins LLP:

• Steven David Moore
  • Role: Partner, Co-Head of the Intellectual Property & Technology Litigation practice.
  • Firm & Office: Vinson & Elkins LLP, San Francisco, CA.
  • Experience Note: Steven Moore is a seasoned trial lawyer focusing on intellectual property and complex commercial litigation, with extensive jury trial experience in major patent litigation venues, including the Eastern District of Texas. He has secured substantial jury awards exceeding $100 million as lead trial counsel in the Eastern District of Texas. While initially listed with Kilpatrick Townsend for this case and appearing in a docket entry in November 2025, his recent affiliation and leadership role at Vinson & Elkins suggest that if he is still representing the plaintiffs in this case, it would be through Vinson & Elkins.

The filings are not sealed, and counsel has appeared for the plaintiffs.

Despite extensive web searches for the docket of Zodiac Pool Systems LLC v. Wybotics, Co. Ltd., case number 2:25-cv-00582, in the Eastern District of Texas, direct confirmation of the counsel of record for the defendant, Wybotics Co., Ltd., is not explicitly available through publicly accessible search results. Docket sheets from PACER or similar court databases were not directly retrievable to list the specific appearance attorneys for this case.

However, a closely related case, Wybotics Inc. et al v. Zodiac Pool Systems LLC et al, case number 2:25-cv-08526, filed in the Central District of California, names Wybotics Inc. and Wybotics, Co. Ltd. as plaintiffs and lists their counsel. This Central District of California case was subsequently stayed pending the resolution of the Eastern District of Texas case (2:25-cv-00582), indicating a strong connection and likely shared legal representation for Wybotics.

Based on the counsel appearing for Wybotics in the related California case, the following attorneys from Jones Day are highly likely to be representing Wybotics Co., Ltd. in the Eastern District of Texas patent infringement case:

• Alexis Adian Smith (Lexi)

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred based on firm prominence and patent litigation experience)
  • Firm: Jones Day
  • Office Location: Los Angeles, CA.
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Lexi Smith is an accomplished trial lawyer who assists clients in complex intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and licensing disputes. She has represented pharmaceutical companies in patent litigation and has secured substantial awards for clients, including a $107.5 million jury verdict in a patent dispute involving a lung cancer treatment. She also has experience with Federal Circuit appeals and pretrial resolutions.

• Ryan B. McCrum

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred based on firm prominence and patent litigation experience)
  • Firm: Jones Day
  • Office Location: Cleveland, OH.
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Ryan McCrum co-chairs Jones Day's ITC practice and has 25 years of experience in high-stakes patent litigation. He is recognized as a first-chair patent litigator with a strong winning track record at the International Trade Commission (ITC) and in district court. He was part of the trial team that achieved a $2.54 billion patent infringement verdict for Merck & Co. against Gilead. His experience spans various technologies and he teaches a course on ITC patent litigation at Cleveland State University College of Law.

• Susan M. Gerber

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred based on firm prominence and patent litigation experience)
  • Firm: Jones Day
  • Office Location: Cleveland, OH.
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Sue Gerber practices intellectual property law, with extensive experience in patent infringement litigation, appeals (including before the Federal Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court), trademark infringement, and false advertising cases. She has been involved in numerous intellectual property trials and has significant experience in cross-border intellectual property enforcement. She has successfully represented clients in tooth whitening strip patent disputes.

Potential Local Counsel:
It is common for out-of-state firms litigating in the Eastern District of Texas to associate with local counsel to navigate local rules and procedures. While no specific local counsel firm or attorney has been identified for Wybotics Co., Ltd. in this specific case through the available search results, firms like Gillam & Smith LLP (Marshall and Tyler, TX) are well-known in the Eastern District of Texas for their patent litigation experience and often serve as local counsel. Attorneys such as Melissa Smith and J. Travis Underwood of Gillam & Smith LLP have extensive experience in Eastern District of Texas patent cases, often serving as local counsel. However, their specific involvement in this case for Wybotics could not be confirmed.