Untitled case

Accusearch Technologies LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE), has initiated its first patent infringement litigation by suing Google LLC in the District of Delaware. Accusearch Technologies LLC acquired a portfolio of patents from the sole inventor Robert Osann, Jr., on February 24, 2024, and this lawsuit represents its initial assertion of these rights. The defendant, Google LLC (a subsidiary of Alphabet), is a global technology operating company well-known for its internet-related services and products. The lawsuit alleges that Google's "Search Engine Products and Services," including the Google website and Chrome browser, infringe upon the asserted patent. Specifically, the accused technology involves features characterized as "providing annotated Internet search results suitable for display to a user on a computing device, (e.g., PC, mobile phone, or tablet device)".

The core of this litigation centers on U.S. Patent No. 11,971,937, titled "System and Method for Displaying and Interacting with Search Results". This patent broadly relates to methods and systems for searching for and displaying relevant information related to items in a collection, such as Internet search results, by providing annotated search results suitable for various computing devices. The case, 1:25-cv-00514, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware before Judge Gregory B. Williams. Delaware is a prominent venue for patent litigation due to its experienced judiciary and sophisticated patent-specific precedent, particularly for cases against corporations incorporated in the state, which includes many major technology companies like Google.

This case is notable as it marks Accusearch Technologies LLC's first venture into patent litigation, positioning it as a patent assertion entity. The target, Google, and the accused products—core search engine functionality—highlight the high-stakes nature of the dispute. Furthermore, while not directly involving patent 11,971,937, related patents within the same litigation, such as U.S. Patent No. 10,867,001, are already facing validity challenges through inter partes review (IPR) petitions filed by Google at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), indicating a multi-front legal battle over the asserted intellectual property.

Accusearch Technologies LLC v. Google LLC - Key Legal Developments

Case Caption: Accusearch Technologies LLC v. Google LLC
Case Number: 1:25-cv-00514
Court: Delaware District Court
Status: Pending
Plaintiff(s): Accusearch Technologies LLC
Defendant(s): Google LLC
Patents at Issue: US Patent 11971937

Legal Developments:

• Filing of Complaint (2025-04-29): Accusearch Technologies LLC initiated the patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the Delaware District Court.

As of May 30, 2026, details regarding the defendant's answer, counterclaims, significant pre-trial motions (such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay pending IPR), claim construction (Markman) outcomes, discovery milestones, or any trial events and their outcomes are not publicly available through the conducted searches. The case remains pending in the Delaware District Court.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

No parallel Post-Grant Review (PGR) or Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings concerning US Patent 11971937 were found at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) through the performed searches. While one IPR (IPR2026-00286) involving AccuSearch Technologies LLC as Patent Owner and Google LLC as Petitioner was identified, it pertained to US Patent 10585959, not 11971937. [cite: 10 (previous search results)]

Here is the identified counsel of record representing Accusearch Technologies LLC in case 1:25-cv-00514:

Brian A. Biggs

• Role: Local Counsel
• Firm: Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Brian Biggs is a patent attorney with over 15 years of experience, practicing in areas including biotech, chemical, computer architecture, and software. He is listed as representing Accusearch Technologies LLC in this case.

Andrew Colin Mayo

• Role: Local Counsel
• Firm: Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Andrew Colin Mayo is listed as counsel for AccuSearch Technologies LLC in this case.

Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.

• Role: Of Counsel / Local Counsel
• Firm: Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Mr. Farnan served as a United States District Judge for the District of Delaware from 1985 to 2010, including as Chief Judge from 1997-2001, presiding over numerous patent and complex commercial disputes. His current practice at Farnan LLP focuses on complex commercial matters, including patent litigation, and he is often involved as Delaware counsel in high-stakes litigation.

Brian E. Farnan

• Role: Local Counsel
• Firm: Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Brian Farnan's practice focuses on complex litigation, including patent litigation, often assisting out-of-state counsel as Delaware counsel. He has tried numerous jury and bench trials in Delaware's federal and state courts and is recognized for his experience acting for plaintiffs in patent litigation.

It is worth noting that while Jeffrey T. Castellano was part of the initial search query, the provided search results did not explicitly confirm his representation of Accusearch Technologies LLC in this specific case. He is known for extensive patent litigation experience with DLA Piper and his own firm, Castellano PLLC, often as lead counsel. However, without a direct docket entry or explicit mention linking him to Accusearch in 1:25-cv-00514, he is not included as counsel of record for the plaintiff based on the provided information.Here is the counsel of record representing Accusearch Technologies LLC in case 1:25-cv-00514:

Brian A. Biggs

• Role: Local Counsel
• Firm: Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Brian Biggs is a patent attorney known for his sophisticated representation of clients in complex patent disputes, often involving complex technology. His practice areas include biotech, chemical, computer architecture, and software.

Andrew C. Mayo

• Role: Local Counsel
• Firm: Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Andrew Mayo is an Intellectual Property Litigation attorney with a strong background in litigation and contract analysis, known for his deep insight into the space and for providing efficient, well-thought-out advice. He has been recognized as a "Leading Individual" in Intellectual Property by Chambers USA.

Lisa Phillips

• Role: Counsel
• Firm: Not specified in the provided search results.
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Lisa Phillips is listed with contact info in relation to AccuSearch Technologies LLC v. Google LLC (1:25-cv-00514), but further details on her firm and specific patent litigation experience for this case are not available from the current search results.

Chandran B. Iyer

• Role: Counsel
• Firm: Not specified in the provided search results.
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Chandran B. Iyer is listed with contact info in relation to AccuSearch Technologies LLC v. Google LLC (1:25-cv-00514), but further details on his firm and specific patent litigation experience for this case are not available from the current search results.

While Joseph J. Farnan, Jr. and Brian E. Farnan of Farnan LLP are prominent local counsel in Delaware for patent litigation and their profiles show extensive experience in this area, the provided search results from PacerMonitor specifically listing attorneys for this case (1:25-cv-00514) did not include them. Therefore, they are not listed as counsel of record for the plaintiff in this specific case based on the explicit information from the docket-related search.

Defendant: Google LLC

Counsel of Record for Google LLC:

Lead Counsel (appearing pro hac vice):

• David J. Silbert

  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP
  • Office Location: San Francisco, California
  • Relevant Experience: Partner at a high-caliber firm widely recognized for representing clients in high-stakes intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement and trade secrets cases. Keker, Van Nest & Peters has a history of representing Google in significant patent and copyright infringement trials. He is listed as appearing pro hac vice for Google LLC in this case.

• Catherine C. Porto

  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP
  • Office Location: San Francisco, California
  • Relevant Experience: Attorney focusing on business litigation and intellectual property litigation. She was selected as a "Rising Star" for 2025-2026 for Business Litigation. She is listed as appearing pro hac vice for Google LLC in this case.

• J.D. Schneider

  • Firm: Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
  • Office Location: Denver, Colorado
  • Relevant Experience: An intellectual property attorney with Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. He is listed as appearing pro hac vice for Google LLC in this case. (Note: While other attorneys named "Schneider" with IP experience exist, this J.D. Schneider is the most probable match given the firm affiliation).

• Edward Bayley

  • Firm: Information not explicitly found in public search results.
  • Role: Lead counsel (appearing pro hac vice), based on the motion for pro hac vice appearance.
  • Relevant Experience: Specific patent litigation experience for Edward Bayley was not found in the provided search results. He is listed as appearing pro hac vice for Google LLC in this case.

• Ryan J. Hayward

  • Firm: Information not explicitly found regarding his current firm representing Google. (Note: A Ryan C. Hayward is listed on Justia for patents he invented, not for legal representation. Another Caroline Hayward in London practices IP law).
  • Role: Lead counsel (appearing pro hac vice), based on the motion for pro hac vice appearance.
  • Relevant Experience: Specific patent litigation experience for Ryan J. Hayward representing clients was not found in the provided search results. He is listed as appearing pro hac vice for Google LLC in this case.

• Emily Hasselberg

  • Firm: Information not explicitly found in public search results.
  • Role: Lead counsel (appearing pro hac vice), based on the motion for pro hac vice appearance.
  • Relevant Experience: Specific patent litigation experience for Emily Hasselberg was not found in the provided search results. She is listed as appearing for Google LLC in this case.

Local Counsel:

• Brian P. Egan

  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP
  • Office Location: Wilmington, Delaware
  • Relevant Experience: Partner and Practice Group Coordinator for Morris Nichols' Intellectual Property Litigation Group. He regularly represents technology companies in patent infringement, trade secrets, and other litigation matters, often acting as lead or Delaware counsel. He has experience before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and is recognized for his patent litigation expertise by Chambers USA and IAM Patent 1000. He filed the motion for pro hac vice appearances for the lead counsel.

• Cameron Paul Clark

  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP
  • Office Location: Wilmington, Delaware
  • Relevant Experience: Associate with the Intellectual Property Litigation practice, focusing on patent, copyright, and trademark cases across various technologies. He has been recognized as a Delaware Super Lawyers Rising Star for intellectual property litigation.

• Jeremy A. Tigan

  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP
  • Office Location: Wilmington, Delaware
  • Relevant Experience: IP litigation partner at Morris Nichols, and former head of the practice group (2020-2024). His practice focuses on patent infringement and trade secret disputes, often acting as lead or Delaware counsel, particularly in semiconductors, software, pharmaceuticals, and consumer products technologies. He is recognized as a leading Delaware patent litigator by Chambers USA, IAM Patent 1000, and Managing Intellectual Property's IP Stars.