Untitled case

In a recent patent infringement lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Virginia, Security First Innovations, LLC (SFI), a Virginia-based company focused on data security solutions, has accused International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), a multinational technology and consulting giant, of infringing its patents. The core of the dispute revolves around IBM's Cloud Object Storage system and related products, specifically targeting features related to data parsing and encryption. SFI, described as having developed innovative solutions for data security in outsourced and cloud computing, claims that IBM's offerings infringe upon its intellectual property.

The primary patent at issue, among others including US Patents 8,271,802 and 8,904,194, is US Patent 9,135,456. These patents generally relate to "systems for securing Data-At-Rest from unauthorized access or use," employing methods that involve splitting data into portions and encrypting each portion before storage. The lawsuit, case number 1:25-cv-00514, is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, a venue famously known as a "rocket docket" for its expedited litigation timeline and efficient handling of complex cases, especially intellectual property disputes. District Judge Anthony J. Trenga has been assigned to the new case.

This case is notable for several reasons, including allegations of willful infringement stemming from a prior business relationship between SFI (or its predecessor, Security First Corporation) and IBM. SFI claims that IBM had contracted to incorporate SFI's technology into its products for over a decade, with Security First allegedly delivering multiple products and engaging in Joint Development Agreements with IBM before the termination of their last contract in 2019. Furthermore, SFI has a parallel, stayed litigation against Google involving related patents, where the stay is awaiting the outcome of multiple inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This suggests a pattern of assertion by SFI and highlights the potential for IPR challenges to influence the trajectory of this case against IBM.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for Security First Innovations, LLC v. International Business Machines Corporation

This case, Security First Innovations, LLC v. International Business Corporation, case number 1:25-cv-00514, is an active patent infringement lawsuit in the Eastern District of Virginia concerning US Patent 9,135,456.

Filing & Initial Pleadings

• Complaint: Security First Innovations, LLC (SFI) filed its complaint against International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) on March 24, 2025. The complaint alleges infringement of US Patent 9,135,456.

As the case is still active, further developments such as answers, counterclaims, substantive pre-trial motions, claim construction, discovery, trial, and final disposition are not yet publicly available or have not occurred.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings

There is no readily available information regarding parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings specifically for US Patent 9,135,456 that are linked to this case. (A search of the USPTO's PTAB database would be required to definitively confirm the absence or presence of such proceedings).

The counsel of record representing the plaintiff, Security First Innovations, LLC, in Security First Innovations, LLC v. International Business Machines Corporation, case number 1:25-cv-00514 in the Virginia Eastern District Court, are as follows:

• Aviv Shaul Halpern

  • Role: Likely lead counsel or significant counsel.
  • Firm: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Palo Alto, CA (Palo Alto-Na indicates location and non-attorney contact provided).
  • Note: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP is a prominent firm with a robust intellectual property and litigation practice.

• Andrei Iancu

  • Role: Likely lead counsel or significant counsel.
  • Firm: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Washington, D.C. (dc-Na indicates location and non-attorney contact provided).
  • Note: Andrei Iancu is widely recognized in patent litigation, having previously served as the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). His experience would suggest a lead role in patent infringement matters.

• Alexander Nourse Gross

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP.
  • Note: (Specific office location not detailed in snippet, but likely New York, Palo Alto, or Washington D.C. given the other attorneys).

• Stephen Joseph Elliott

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY (ny-Na indicates location and non-attorney contact provided).

• William Rueger Poynter

  • Role: Local counsel.
  • Firm: Kaleo Legal.
  • Note: Kaleo Legal is based in Virginia, making Mr. Poynter a likely candidate for local counsel in the Eastern District of Virginia, which is known as a "rocket docket" for its expedited litigation.

• Charles Bennett Molster, III

  • Role: Local counsel.
  • Firm: The Law Offices Of Charles B. Molster III PLLC.
  • Note: Mr. Molster is a Virginia-based attorney, also indicating a likely local counsel role for cases in the Eastern District of Virginia.

In the ongoing patent infringement case Security First Innovations, LLC v. International Business Machines Corporation, case number 1:25-cv-00514, filed in the Eastern District of Virginia, the defendant International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) is primarily represented by attorneys from Desmarais LLP. Notably, David J. Shaw, who was previously counsel, was granted leave to withdraw from the case on May 8, 2026.

The following attorneys from Desmarais LLP are of record for IBM:

• YuKai Bao

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, likely from an office in California or New York.
  • Experience Note: While specific experience for this case is not detailed, Desmarais LLP is a well-known patent litigation firm.

• Tamir Packin

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, New York office.
  • Experience Note: As part of Desmarais LLP, he is involved in patent litigation.

• Adam D. Steinmetz

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, Washington D.C. office.
  • Experience Note: His presence in the D.C. office suggests involvement in federal court matters, including patent litigation.

• William N. Yau

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, New York office.
  • Experience Note: Part of the patent litigation team at Desmarais LLP.

• Deborah J. Mariottini

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, New York office.
  • Experience Note: Engaged in patent litigation as an attorney with Desmarais LLP.

• Benjamin N. Luehrs

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP, New York office.
  • Experience Note: Contributes to patent litigation efforts at Desmarais LLP.

• Justin Patrick Daniel Wilcox

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP.
  • Experience Note: Filed the motion to withdraw for David J. Shaw, indicating active representation in the case.

As of the current date, no other local counsel or in-house attorneys for IBM in this specific case have been explicitly identified in the available public docket information beyond those from Desmarais LLP.