Untitled case

Mark Sandstrom initiated this patent infringement litigation on July 19, 2024, in the District of Minnesota against Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget L.M. Ericsson. Sandstrom, an individual inventor, appears to be acting as a patent assertion entity, representing himself in this and several other related cases targeting major telecommunications companies over network protocol standards. Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget L.M. Ericsson are prominent global telecommunications equipment and services providers.

The lawsuit alleged infringement related to "packet transport networking and dynamic switching," specifically touching upon network protocol standards such as BIER, NETCONF, and xGPON. While the prompt identifies US Patent 7558260 as at issue, court records and legal analyses indicate that Sandstrom asserted a set of four or five patents across his "networking campaign" of related cases. For the specific case 0:24-cv-02796, four patents were asserted, covering packet transport networking and dynamic switching. U.S. Patent No. 7,558,260, titled "Dynamic switching in a network," broadly describes systems and methods for dynamically switching network traffic based on various criteria, potentially optimizing network performance and resource utilization.

This case, assigned to District Judge Eric C. Tostrud and referred to Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, was filed in the District of Minnesota. However, it had a brief lifespan, being voluntarily dismissed by Mark Sandstrom on October 30, 2024, just 103 days after filing, and notably before Ericsson had even filed an answer. The rapid dismissal, particularly after Ericsson engaged substantial IP litigation firms, suggests an aggressive early defense strategy by the defendant may have influenced the plaintiff's decision to withdraw. The case is part of a broader "networking campaign" by Sandstrom, which includes similar declaratory judgment actions against AT&T, Charter Communications, and Nokia in the same district, asserting overlapping sets of patents related to network protocol standards. The voluntary dismissal raises questions about potential re-filing risks, especially concerning Rule 41(a)(1)(B), which could deem a second voluntary dismissal as an adjudication on the merits.

Mark Sandstrom filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson and Ericsson Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota on July 19, 2024, case number 0:24-cv-02796. The complaint asserted US Patent 7558260, among others, alleging infringement related to certain network protocol standards. District Judge Eric C. Tostrud and Referred Judge Dulce J. Foster were assigned to the case.

Key legal developments and outcome for the litigation include:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings: The lawsuit was initiated by Mark Sandstrom, representing himself, on July 19, 2024. Sandstrom sought declaratory judgments, asserting that Ericsson required a license for the use of the asserted patents in connection with network protocol standards such as BIER, NETCONF, and xGPON. The specific patents asserted against Ericsson in this and related cases included 7,558,260, 10,567,474, 10,848,546, and 7,333,511.
• Pre-trial Motions: On October 30, 2024, the Plaintiff's request for an expedited declaratory-judgment action was denied by the court. An order was also issued regarding the Plaintiff's Request for Admissions (Docket 19), and a motion for Defendant to Answer (Docket 11) was denied.
• Final Disposition: The case was closed relatively quickly, on October 30, 2024, lasting 103 days. The dismissal was effected under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). This rule allows a plaintiff to dismiss an action without a court order, typically before the defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, or by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. The nature of the dismissal suggests a voluntary termination by the plaintiff.
• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings: As of the current date, there is no public record of any Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings specifically targeting US Patent 7558260 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that directly impacted this litigation.

In the patent infringement case 0:24-cv-02796 in the Minnesota District Court, the plaintiff, Mark Sandstrom, is representing himself. He is proceeding pro se, meaning he is acting as his own counsel.

Plaintiff's Counsel:

• Name: Mark Sandstrom
• Role: Pro Se Litigant (acting as his own counsel)
• Firm: N/A
• Office Location: N/A
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Mark Sandstrom is the sole named inventor on the asserted patents and is involved in multiple patent litigation cases as a plaintiff, often representing himself or through entities like Optimum Communications Services, Inc.. He was granted e-filing access as a pro se litigant in this case on July 25, 2024.

In the patent infringement case 0:24-cv-02796, filed in the Minnesota District Court, the defendant is Ericsson Inc..

As of the current date, July 21, 2026, a specific counsel of record for Ericsson Inc. in this particular case, including names, roles, firms, and office locations, has not been identified through public web searches of PACER, docket sheets, firm websites, or legal news outlets. The available search results indicate the case caption and the defendant but do not explicitly list the attorneys representing Ericsson Inc.. Filings may be sealed or specific attorney appearances may not be readily accessible through standard public search methods without direct PACER access.