Untitled case

This case involves a patent infringement lawsuit filed by individual inventor Manuel Tijerino against Spotify USA Inc., an operating company well-known for its music and podcast streaming services. Spotify operates on a "freemium" model, offering both ad-supported free services and premium subscription tiers. Tijerino, acting pro se, asserts U.S. Patent No. 9,146,925, titled "User defined internet jukebox kiosks set top box." The patent broadly relates to systems and methods for user-defined internet jukebox kiosks. Spotify's streaming services, including its metadata tracking, PRO reporting, and revenue-sharing mechanisms, are the accused infringing products/services. Spotify is actively involved in patent innovation and has a substantial global patent portfolio, exceeding 1,600 patents, predominantly in the U.S., focusing on music streaming, content discovery, personalization algorithms, and user experience.

The procedural posture of this case is currently a patent infringement lawsuit, Tijerino v. Spotify USA Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-CV-08176), presided over by Judge Edgardo Ramos. This case was initially filed in the Eastern District of Louisiana (Case No. 2:24-CV-02290) on September 18, 2024, before being transferred to the Southern District of New York on October 2, 2025. The transfer of venue is significant, as patent litigation trends can vary across districts, with the Southern District of New York being an active venue for intellectual property cases. Concurrently, Spotify Ab (a related entity to Spotify USA Inc.) has challenged the '925 patent in an Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-01280) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with institution granted on December 17, 2025. A motion to stay the district court litigation pending the IPR outcome is currently pending before Judge Ramos.

This case is notable due to the pro se assertion of a patent by an individual inventor against a major operating company like Spotify, which is a Unified Patents member and historically faces patent assertions from Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs). The IPR proceeding at the PTAB is a direct challenge to the validity of the asserted patent claims, and its outcome will significantly impact the ongoing district court litigation. The pendency of the motion to stay in the district court, awaiting the IPR's resolution, highlights the strategic interplay between these two forums in patent disputes. The case also touches upon the ongoing debate regarding venue in patent litigation and the challenges faced by individual inventors in asserting their rights against large corporations.

This case involves a patent infringement lawsuit, Tijerino v. Spotify USA Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-CV-08176), and a parallel Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2025-01280, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging US Patent No. 9,146,925.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• 2024-09-18: Manuel Tijerino filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Spotify USA Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Case No. 2:24-CV-02290).

Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• 2025-10-02: The district court case was transferred from the Eastern District of Louisiana to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-CV-08176), with Judge Edgardo Ramos presiding.
• 2025-10-21: Spotify USA Inc. filed a letter motion requesting a conference to seek permission to move to stay the district court proceedings pending the resolution of the IPR.
• 2025-10-29: A telephonic status conference was held before Judge Ramos. Spotify was granted leave to file a motion to stay. The court established a briefing schedule for the motion to stay: moving papers were due by November 19, 2025; opposition by December 17, 2025; and a reply by January 2, 2026. The case was stayed pending the resolution of this motion.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings:

• 2025-07-11: Spotify Ab (related to Spotify USA Inc.) filed a Petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-01280) challenging US Patent No. 9,146,925.
• 2025-09-29: Manuel Tijerino, as the Patent Owner, filed a Preliminary Response to the IPR petition.
• 2025-10-06: The PTAB authorized additional briefing in the IPR, limited to addressing the priority claim of the '925 patent. Spotify was to file its reply within 7 business days, and Tijerino was to file a sur-reply within 7 days thereafter.
• 2025-12-17: The PTAB instituted the Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-01280), meaning a trial was granted to review the patentability of the challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,146,925.

Present Posture:
The district court litigation is currently stayed pending the resolution of Spotify's motion to stay, which itself is awaiting a decision on the IPR. The IPR proceeding at the PTAB has been instituted, and a final written decision is pending.

The plaintiff in this patent infringement case, Manuel Tijerino, is representing himself pro se in both the district court litigation (Tijerino v. Spotify USA Inc., S.D.N.Y. Case No. 1:25-CV-08176) and the parallel IPR proceeding (IPR2025-01280) before the PTAB.

Therefore, there is no external counsel of record representing the plaintiff.

• Name: Manuel Tijerino
• Role: Pro Se Plaintiff / Patent Owner (Lead Counsel - Self-Representation)
• Firm: N/A (Self-represented)
• Office Location: 2141 Leslie Street, Gretna, LA 70056
• Note: Mr. Tijerino is the individual inventor and patent owner of U.S. Patent No. 9,146,925, titled "User defined internet jukebox kiosks set top box." He has filed various motions and responses in both the district court and PTAB proceedings on his own behalf.

Spotify USA Inc. is represented by counsel from Morrison & Foerster LLP in the IPR proceeding (IPR2025-01280). While specific counsel for the district court litigation (Tijerino v. Spotify USA Inc., S.D.N.Y. Case No. 1:25-CV-08176) is not explicitly detailed in the provided search results, it is common for the same firm to handle related district court and PTAB matters for a client.

Here are the attorneys of record for Spotify Ab in the IPR proceeding, who are likely involved in advising Spotify USA Inc. in the related district court case:

Morrison & Foerster LLP

• Alex S. Yap
  • Role: Attorney for Petitioner (Spotify Ab)
  • Firm: Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • Note: Morrison & Foerster has a significant intellectual property practice.
• Mehran Arjomand
  • Role: Attorney for Petitioner (Spotify Ab)
  • Firm: Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • Note: Morrison & Foerster is known for its patent litigation and intellectual property work.
• Bryan A. Blumenkopf
  • Role: Attorney for Petitioner (Spotify Ab)
  • Firm: Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • Note: Morrison & Foerster is a firm with extensive experience in patent trials and appeals.

It is worth noting that Spotify has previously been represented by other prominent intellectual property firms in patent litigation, such as Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and Fish & Richardson P.C., in past patent disputes. However, for the current IPR, Morrison & Foerster LLP is listed as counsel.