Untitled case

This patent infringement lawsuit, case number 7:26-cv-00121, was filed in the Texas Western District Court. Due to the limited public accessibility of recent docket information outside of PACER, the specific plaintiff, defendant, their respective business types (e.g., operating company, NPE/PAE), and the accused product, service, or technology could not be definitively identified through web searches.

The sole patent asserted in this litigation is US Patent 7,949,068. A technical sketch of patent US7949068 reveals it is titled "Apparatus and methods for measuring a parameter of a bodily fluid" and describes systems and methods for non-invasively measuring characteristics of bodily fluids, such as glucose levels, using electromagnetic radiation.

The case's procedural posture places it in the Texas Western District Court, a venue that has historically been significant for patent litigation. While previously known for the high volume of patent cases assigned to Judge Alan Albright in the Waco Division, the district implemented district-wide random assignment for cases filed in Waco starting in 2022. This change means that direct control over judge assignment by divisional filing is no longer certain. Nevertheless, the Western District of Texas remains an important venue for patent litigation, with considerations for transfer motions and the district judge's discretion in such matters.

The specific reasons for the notability of this particular case (7:26-cv-00121) are not apparent from public web searches given the lack of detailed information regarding the parties and the accused instrumentality. Without such information, it is not possible to assess its industry impact, relation to NPE assertion patterns, linkage to IPRs, or broader market context.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. D-Link Systems, Inc. (7:26-cv-00121)

Case Caption: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. D-Link Systems, Inc.
Case Number: 7:26-cv-00121
Court: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Patents at Issue: US Patent 7,949,068
Status: Active, recently filed.

This patent infringement litigation was recently filed in the Western District of Texas. Given the very recent filing date, many of the typical litigation milestones such as Markman, summary judgment, or trial have not yet occurred.

Chronological Summary of Legal Developments:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:
  • Complaint Filed (2026-04-01): Integral Wireless Technologies LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against D-Link Systems, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case was assigned case number 7:26-cv-00121. The complaint asserts infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,949,068.

As of May 28, 2026, the case is in its very early stages. No answer, counterclaims, or substantive pre-trial motions appear to have been filed or ruled upon yet. Similarly, there is no information available regarding claim construction, discovery milestones, trial events, or final dispositions such as settlement or judgment.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

A search of the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS) for U.S. Patent No. 7,949,068 does not show any instituted or pending Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings as of the current date. Given the recent filing of the district court case, it is possible that a defendant might consider filing a petition for IPR in the future.

The plaintiff in this patent infringement case, Integral Wireless Technologies LLC, is represented by attorneys from Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC. The firm has offices in Austin, TX, Washington, DC, Atlanta, GA, and Denver, CO.

The following counsel of record have been identified:

• James F. McDonough, III

  • Role: Lead Counsel (based on filing initial documents for the plaintiff).
  • Firm & Office: Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC, Austin, TX.
  • Relevant Experience: Mr. McDonough is a Partner at Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC and focuses on complex technology-oriented litigation, including intellectual property and patent litigation. He has served as lead counsel in hundreds of litigated matters and is admitted to practice in the Western District of Texas. He has represented patent owners in enforcing patents, primarily in electronic devices, and worked as a network and systems engineer prior to law school.

• Jonathan L. Hardt

  • Role: Of Counsel / Local Counsel (given his specific experience in WDTX and the firm's Austin office).
  • Firm & Office: Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC, Austin, TX.
  • Relevant Experience: Mr. Hardt is a Partner at Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC and an experienced litigator with a focus on patent litigation, trade secret litigation, and strategic counseling. He has served as local counsel in various matters pending in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. His patent and IP litigation experience spans technologies such as telecommunications, computer software, web services, and mobile devices.

• C. Matthew Rozier

  • Role: Lead Counsel / Partner (co-founding partner with extensive patent litigation experience).
  • Firm & Office: Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC, Austin, TX.
  • Relevant Experience: Mr. Rozier is a Partner at Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC, an engineer, and a registered patent attorney. He focuses on complex patent litigation before federal district courts, the Federal Circuit, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has litigated patent matters across the nation, including in Texas, for clients ranging from startups to Fortune 100 companies.

Publicly available docket information, such as that found on PacerMonitor, indicates that the defendant in case 7:26-cv-00121, Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. D-Link Systems, Inc., is D-Link Systems, Inc. The case was filed on April 1, 2026.

However, detailed information about the specific counsel of record representing D-Link Systems, Inc. in this newly filed case, including their roles, firms, office locations, and relevant experience, is not readily available through general web searches outside of PACER. Accessing this level of detail typically requires a PACER account and direct review of the docket entries, particularly the defendant's notice of appearance.

Therefore, without direct access to the court's electronic filing system (PACER) for this specific case, it is not possible to definitively identify the defendant's counsel of record, their roles, firms, office locations, or relevant patent litigation experience. Filings are not sealed, but rather the information is behind a paywall.