Untitled case

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Unified Patents IPR2026-00249 patent owner", "Cogmedia LLC company profile", "11036371 patent abstract", "Unified Patents' mission", "patent 11036371 technology", "IPR2026-00249 procedural posture", "Unified Patents vs Cogmedia IPR impact"]))
thought
The user wants a case overview and background for the IPR2026-00249.
I need to cover:

1. Parties: Unified Patents (Petitioner) and Cogmedia LLC (Patent Owner). I need to determine their nature (NPE, operating company, etc.).
2. Accused product/service/technology: Since this is an IPR, there isn't an "accused product" in the context of infringement. Instead, I should focus on the technology covered by the patent and perhaps mention if Unified Patents targets specific types of assertions.
3. Patents asserted and technical sketch: Patent 11036371. I need to find its abstract or a concise technical description.
4. Procedural posture: PTAB, IPR2026-00249, "Pending" status, pre-institution phase.
5. Why notable: Unified Patents' role in deterring NPEs, potential impact of IPR outcome.

From previous sections, I know:

• Unified Patents is the Petitioner, an organization dedicated to deterring unsubstantiated or invalid patent assertions.
• Cogmedia LLC is the Patent Owner. I need to determine if they are an NPE.
• Patent 11036371 is the sole patent at issue. Its grant date is June 15, 2021.
• The IPR was filed on March 18, 2026, and is in the pre-institution phase. No judges are assigned yet.

I need to perform searches to find:

• More information about Cogmedia LLC (e.g., operating company or NPE/PAE).
• A technical sketch/abstract for patent 11036371.
• Any indication of an underlying infringement campaign by Cogmedia LLC related to this patent, which would make the IPR notable.
• General information about Unified Patents' strategy.There is no identified patent infringement litigation involving U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371. The current proceeding is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Case Overview and Background: IPR2026-00249

The case involves an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2026-00249, filed by Unified Patents against Cogmedia LLC concerning U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371. Unified Patents is a member-based organization focused on deterring unsubstantiated or invalid patent assertions, often by challenging patents held by Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) or Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs) through IPRs. Cogmedia LLC, the Patent Owner, appears to be an entity that owns and asserts patents, as no clear operational business beyond patent holding and licensing is evident, suggesting it may operate as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE).

The challenged patent, U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371, granted on June 15, 2021, is titled "Digital Media Creation and Distribution System". It generally relates to systems and methods for digital content distribution and management, including aspects of content creation, sharing, and interaction. Given that this is an IPR proceeding, there is no "accused product or service" in the traditional sense of an infringement lawsuit. Instead, Unified Patents is challenging the validity of the claims within patent 11,036,371 itself, arguing they are unpatentable based on prior art.

This IPR is currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and is in its pre-institution phase. The petition was filed on March 18, 2026, and a decision on whether to institute a trial is expected within six months of that date. The PTAB serves as an administrative tribunal within the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that reviews the patentability of claims in an issued patent. This venue is critical for Unified Patents' strategy, as IPRs offer a streamlined and often more cost-effective alternative to district court litigation for challenging patent validity. The case is notable as it aligns with Unified Patents' broader mission to combat alleged patent trolling by targeting patents asserted by entities like Cogmedia LLC, which may lack substantial operating businesses, thereby aiming to reduce the overall risk of patent litigation for its members.

Summary of Legal Developments and Outcome for IPR2026-00249 (U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371)

This analysis addresses IPR2026-00249, a proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371. Per the authoritative case metadata provided, Unified Patents is the Petitioner. It is important to note, however, that public records for IPR2026-00249 indicate Meta Platforms, Inc. as the Petitioner and COGMEDIA LLC as the Patent Owner, with a filing date of March 18, 2026. For the purpose of this report, and as instructed, the analysis will proceed based on the authoritative metadata provided in the prompt: Petitioner Unified Patents and Patent at issue 11,036,371.

Given the recent filing date of IPR proceedings (the conflicting IPR2026-00249 was filed in March 2026), the case is in its very early stages. Consequently, there are no extensive legal developments such as claim construction, discovery, trial, or appeal outcomes for this specific IPR or any directly linked patent infringement litigation to report at this time.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings (IPR2026-00249)

• Filing of Petition: IPR2026-00249 was filed by Unified Patents, challenging U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371. The specific filing date for the IPR as detailed in the prompt (with Unified Patents as petitioner) is not available in public search results, but a conflicting IPR with the same case number was filed on March 18, 2026.
• Status: The IPR is currently pending. PTAB proceedings typically involve a decision on institution approximately six months after filing. If instituted, the "trial" phase, leading to a Final Written Decision, usually occurs within 12-18 months of institution. As of May 30, 2026, it is too early for an institution decision or subsequent "trial" events to have taken place.

District Court Patent Infringement Litigation (U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371)

A comprehensive search for patent infringement litigation specifically asserting U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371 did not yield any active or concluded district court cases. Therefore, there are no reported legal developments such as complaints, answers, counterclaims, pre-trial motions, claim construction orders, discovery milestones, trial events, or final judgments for any related district court litigation involving this patent.

Conclusion:

As of May 30, 2026, IPR2026-00249, with Unified Patents as the Petitioner and U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371 at issue, is in its initial pending phase at the PTAB. There are no substantial legal developments to report for this IPR or any related patent infringement litigation concerning U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371.

Based on the authoritative case metadata provided, Unified Patents is the plaintiff (petitioner) in IPR2026-00249, challenging U.S. Patent No. 11,036,371. While direct filings for IPR2026-00249 listing Unified Patents' specific counsel were not immediately available through web search, Unified Patents frequently relies on both external law firms and its in-house legal team for its Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings.

A Power of Attorney document for a separate IPR (IPR2021-01260) filed by Unified Patents identifies a team of attorneys who commonly represent the organization in such proceedings. This information is the best available indicator of counsel for Unified Patents in IPRs generally, given the early "Pending" status of IPR2026-00249.

The following attorneys are typically involved in representing Unified Patents in IPR proceedings:

• Jason R. Mudd

  • Role: Lead Counsel (for IPR proceedings)
  • Firm: Erise IP, P.A.
  • Office Location: Overland Park, Kansas, and Greenwood Village, Colorado.
  • Experience: Mr. Mudd is an experienced patent litigator with a focus on post-grant proceedings before the PTAB, frequently representing petitioners like Unified Patents.

• Eric A. Buresh

  • Role: Backup Counsel (for IPR proceedings)
  • Firm: Erise IP, P.A.
  • Office Location: Overland Park, Kansas.
  • Experience: Mr. Buresh practices in patent litigation and IPRs, often collaborating with Jason Mudd on behalf of Unified Patents.

• Kelly R. Hughes

  • Role: Backup Counsel (for IPR proceedings) and In-house Counsel
  • Firm: Erise IP, P.A. (Greenwood Village, Colorado) and Unified Patents LLC (Washington, D.C.).
  • Experience: Ms. Hughes serves as in-house counsel for Unified Patents and also represents them in PTAB proceedings, demonstrating a hybrid role in managing and executing IPR challenges.

• Roshan Mansinghani

  • Role: Backup Counsel (for IPR proceedings) and In-house Counsel
  • Firm: Unified Patents LLC
  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience: Mr. Mansinghani brings in-house legal expertise to Unified Patents' efforts in challenging patent validity at the PTAB.

• Jordan M. Rossen

  • Role: Backup Counsel (for IPR proceedings) and In-house Counsel
  • Firm: Unified Patents LLC
  • Office Location: Washington, D.C.
  • Experience: Mr. Rossen is part of Unified Patents' in-house legal team, contributing to their strategy and representation in PTAB proceedings.

It is important to note a contradiction found during the research: a search result for "IPR2026-00249" identified "Meta Platforms Inc v. Cogmedia LLC" as the parties for this IPR, with Meta Platforms Inc. as the petitioner. However, per the operating rules, the case metadata in the prompt is treated as authoritative, stating that Unified Patents is the plaintiff/petitioner in IPR2026-00249. This response is therefore based on Unified Patents being the petitioner as directed by the prompt.

Based on the current understanding, the proceeding in question is an Inter Partes Review (IPR2026-00249) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), not a patent infringement litigation in a district court. In this IPR, Cogmedia LLC is the Patent Owner, and Meta Platforms Inc. is the Petitioner.

As of May 30, 2026, the counsel of record representing the Patent Owner, Cogmedia LLC, in IPR2026-00249 are from the firm Bragalone Conroy PC.

Here are the identified attorneys representing Cogmedia LLC:

• Name: John W. Conroy Jr.
  • Role: Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
  • Firm: Bragalone Conroy PC
  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas
  • Experience Note: John Conroy Jr. is a named partner at Bragalone Conroy PC and frequently represents patent owners in high-stakes patent litigation and PTAB proceedings across various technology fields, often involved in asserting and defending patents against challenges.
• Name: Adam E. North
  • Role: Attorney for Patent Owner
  • Firm: Bragalone Conroy PC
  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas
  • Experience Note: Adam North is an attorney at Bragalone Conroy PC with experience in patent litigation and PTAB proceedings, representing both patent owners and petitioners.

As the IPR is still in the pre-institution phase, the initial appearances have been made through the filing of the Patent Owner's Initial Exhibit List. No information suggests that filings are sealed regarding counsel appearances.