Untitled case

This ongoing patent infringement case, Piney Woods Mobility LLC v. [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.), was filed on February 26, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, case number 7:26-cv-00068. The plaintiff, Piney Woods Mobility LLC, appears to be a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) or Patent Assertion Entity (PAE), as evidenced by its pattern of filing similar patent infringement lawsuits against multiple major technology and telecommunications companies concerning location-sharing services, including AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, and Samsung Electronics. The defendant, Apple Inc., is a prominent operating company known for its consumer electronics, software, and online services. The litigation asserts U.S. Patent No. 9,253,616, titled "Apparatus and Method for Obtaining Content on a Cellular Wireless Device Based on Proximity." This patent generally relates to systems and methods for obtaining content on a mobile device by processing location information on a server and transmitting relevant content back to the user's device based on its proximity to other devices.

The accused products or services in this case, though not explicitly detailed in the immediately available docket entries for this specific Apple lawsuit, are highly likely related to Apple's location-sharing functionalities. Piney Woods Mobility's complaints against other defendants consistently target "two-way position information sharing technology" and "location-sharing services," such as Verizon Family, T-Mobile Family Mode, and AT&T Secure Family, which utilize a central server to manage and share GPS-based location data among mobile device users. Therefore, Apple's equivalent services, such as "Find My" or location-based features within its operating systems and applications, are the probable focus of the infringement claims.

The procedural posture places the case before Judge Alan D. Albright in the Western District of Texas, a venue highly significant in patent litigation. Judge Albright, assigned to the Waco Division, has been historically renowned for attracting a large volume of patent cases due to his plaintiff-friendly practices, including fast-paced scheduling orders, which can accelerate settlements and make it more challenging for defendants to mount certain challenges, such as inter partes review (IPR) at the PTAB. While the Western District of Texas implemented a random assignment rule in July 2022 to address concerns about venue shopping, Judge Albright continues to oversee a substantial patent docket. This case is notable due to the plaintiff's apparent NPE status and broad assertion campaign against key players in the mobile technology sector, alongside its strategic filing in a district known for its efficiency and plaintiff-favorable environment in patent disputes.

Here's a summary of the key legal developments for case 7:26-cv-00068, based on publicly available information as of June 4, 2026:

Case Name: Piney Woods Mobility LLC v. Apple Inc.
Court: Texas Western District Court
Case Number: 7:26-cv-00068
Patents at Issue: US Patent 9253616
Status: Ongoing

Key Legal Developments:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:
  • The patent infringement lawsuit was filed by Piney Woods Mobility LLC against Apple Inc. on February 26, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.

Given the recent filing date in early 2026, the case is in its very early stages. There is no public information available yet regarding substantive pre-trial motions (such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay), claim construction (Markman) outcomes, discovery milestones, trial events, verdict, or post-trial motions.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

A search of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) database for US Patent 9253616 reveals no active Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings as of June 4, 2026.

The plaintiff in this case, Piney Woods Mobility LLC, is represented by attorneys from Garteiser Honea, PLLC.

The counsel of record for Piney Woods Mobility LLC in case 7:26-cv-00068 include:

• Randall T. Garteiser

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Garteiser Honea, PLLC
  • Office Location: The firm has offices in Tyler, Texas, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience Note: Randall Garteiser is a founding partner of Garteiser Honea, PLLC, focusing on patent litigation. He has represented numerous plaintiffs in patent infringement cases, often against large technology companies.

• Christopher A. Honea

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Garteiser Honea, PLLC
  • Office Location: The firm has offices in Tyler, Texas, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience Note: Christopher Honea is also a founding partner of Garteiser Honea, PLLC, with extensive experience in patent litigation, including preparing complaints and managing case filings.

• M. Scott Fuller

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Garteiser Honea
  • Office Location: The firm has offices in Tyler, Texas, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience Note: M. Scott Fuller is listed as counsel for Piney Woods Mobility LLC in this case.

Based on the available docket information, these attorneys from Garteiser Honea, PLLC, are actively representing Piney Woods Mobility LLC in this patent infringement case.

As of June 4, 2026, the publicly available docket information for Piney Woods Mobility LLC v. Apple Inc., case number 7:26-cv-00068 in the Texas Western District Court, does not list specific counsel of record representing defendant Apple Inc.. The case was filed on February 26, 2026, and appears to be in its very early stages, with summons issued but no appearance of counsel for Apple reflected in the last retrieved docket update from February 27, 2026.

Given that counsel has not yet formally appeared on the docket for Apple Inc. in this specific case, no attorneys can be identified as "counsel of record" at this time. Filings that would typically reveal defense counsel, such as an answer to the complaint or a motion to extend time, have not yet been publicly recorded as listing Apple's attorneys.

However, in other patent litigation matters, particularly within the Texas federal courts, Apple Inc. has been represented by prominent law firms specializing in patent defense. For example, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale) has successfully secured defense verdicts for Apple in patent disputes in the Eastern District of Texas. Attorneys such as Joseph Mueller and Mark Selwyn of WilmerHale were recognized for their work in a 4G LTE patent dispute against Apple. While these examples illustrate firms that have represented Apple in similar contexts, they are not confirmed counsel of record for the Piney Woods Mobility LLC case.