Untitled case

This patent infringement lawsuit, Golden Eye Technologies LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. (2:25-cv-00898), is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, by Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The plaintiff, Golden Eye Technologies LLC, is a non-practicing entity (NPE) or patent assertion entity (PAE), a subsidiary of Harfang IP Investment Corp.. Harfang IP is a monetization firm founded by Chris Dubuc, who previously worked at other patent licensing companies like Longhorn IP, Acacia Research Group, and WiLAN. Golden Eye Technologies LLC acquired the asserted patents from KT Corporation, a South Korean telecommunications company, in 2020.. The defendant, Cisco Systems, Inc., is a multinational technology conglomerate that develops and sells networking hardware, software, telecommunications equipment, and various high-technology services and products, focusing on areas like networking, cybersecurity, and AI..

Golden Eye Technologies alleges that Cisco infringes five US patents: 9,271,243; 9,344,978; 9,717,037; 9,918,236; and 10,051,556. These patents broadly "cover various aspects of controlling wireless access points and access point wireless controllers.". Specifically, the accused products include a wide array of Cisco's networking products and related "components, software, services, and processes" that "generally provide and control wireless local area networks (LAN) service," such as Cisco Catalyst 9100 series Access Points, Cisco Meraki branded Access Points, Cisco Aironet Access Points, Cisco Business 150AX Access Points, and various Cisco Wireless Controllers, including virtual ones.. Some of the asserted patents from Golden Eye's portfolio relate to 4G/5G cellular technologies, Wi-Fi Passpoint technologies, Wi-Fi HaLow (IEEE 802.11ah) technologies, and location-based services in a Wi-Fi environment.. Many of these patents may be standard-essential patents (SEPs) for which prior owners made commitments to license on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND/RAND) terms..

The Eastern District of Texas is a prominent venue for patent litigation, often favored by patent plaintiffs, particularly NPEs.. Judge Rodney Gilstrap is notable for presiding over a significant number of patent cases in the country, often referred to as the "busiest patent judge.". This venue is known for its expedited dockets and procedural rules that can favor plaintiffs in the pre-trial stages.. The case is notable due to the plaintiff being a subsidiary of Harfang IP, a firm known for patent monetization, and the involvement of former operating company patents acquired from KT Corporation.. Furthermore, parallel PTAB IPR proceedings have been initiated by Cisco against at least two of the asserted patents, US Patent 9,717,037 and US Patent 9,271,243, signaling a multi-front challenge to the validity of these patents.. The assertion of patents that may be SEPs and the involvement of a major telecommunications equipment provider like Cisco also make this case significant for the wireless technology industry.

Golden Eye Technologies LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.: Key Legal Developments (2:25-cv-00898 E.D. Tex.)

This patent infringement litigation, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, involves plaintiff Golden Eye Technologies LLC and defendant Cisco Systems, Inc., asserting infringement of U.S. Patent 9,271,243, among others. The case, 2:25-cv-00898, was filed on August 27, 2025, and is presided over by District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

Chronological Legal Developments:

• Filing of Complaint (2025-08-27): Golden Eye Technologies LLC initiated the lawsuit against Cisco Systems, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges infringement of five U.S. Patents: 9,271,243; 9,344,978; 9,717,037; 9,918,236; and 10,051,556. These patents generally relate to controlling wireless access points and wireless controllers.
• Answer Due Date (2025-11-03): An agreed new date for Cisco's answer to the complaint was set for November 3, 2025. Specific details regarding the contents of the answer or any counterclaims filed are not publicly available in the search results.
• Parallel PTAB Proceedings Filed (2026-01-07): Cisco Systems, Inc. filed multiple inter partes review (IPR) petitions with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging the validity of the asserted patents:
  • IPR2026-00188 was filed against U.S. Patent 9,271,243 B2.
  • IPR2026-00187 was filed against U.S. Patent 9,717,037 B2.
• Markman Hearing Set (2025-12-10 for order, 2027-02-01 for hearing): A Markman (claim construction) hearing for the district court case has been scheduled for February 1, 2027, at 9:00 AM before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.
• Institution of IPR2026-00188 (2026-04-28): The PTAB instituted IPR2026-00188, challenging U.S. Patent 9,271,243, on April 28, 2026. This means the PTAB determined there is a reasonable likelihood that Cisco would prevail with respect to at least one challenged claim.
• Status of IPR2026-00187 (Pending Institution): As of the latest available information, IPR2026-00187, challenging U.S. Patent 9,717,037, is pending an institution decision. Golden Eye Technologies LLC has filed a "Patent Owner Request for Discretionary Denial" in this proceeding.
• Status of IPRs for Other Patents: No public information regarding IPR petitions for U.S. Patents 9,344,978; 9,918,236; and 10,051,556 has been found.
• Motion to Stay: No record of a motion to stay the district court litigation pending the outcome of the IPRs has been found in the provided search results. Given the institution of at least one IPR, such a motion would be a common strategic move, but its filing and resolution are not yet reported.
• Current Posture: The district court case remains active, with a Markman hearing scheduled for early 2027. The PTAB proceedings for at least two of the asserted patents are ongoing, with one having been instituted. The overall outcome of the litigation remains to be determined.

Golden Eye Technologies LLC, the plaintiff in Golden Eye Technologies LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. (2:25-cv-00898) in the Texas Eastern District Court, is represented by the following counsel:

Bragalone Olejko Saad PC

• Jeffrey Ray Bragalone
  • Role: Likely lead counsel.
  • Firm & Office: Bragalone Olejko Saad PC, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Jeffrey Bragalone has extensive experience in patent litigation. He has been recognized for his work in intellectual property law, representing plaintiffs in numerous patent infringement cases.
• Terry Afif Saad
  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm & Office: Bragalone Olejko Saad PC, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Terry Saad is involved in intellectual property litigation, frequently representing clients in patent infringement matters.
• Marcus Benavides
  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm & Office: Bragalone Olejko Saad PC, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Marcus Benavides practices in patent litigation.
• Brandon V. Zuniga
  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm & Office: Bragalone Olejko Saad PC, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Brandon Zuniga's practice includes patent litigation.
• Mark Douglass
  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm & Office: Bragalone Olejko Saad PC, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Mark Douglass is involved in intellectual property disputes.

Miller Fair Henry PLLC

• Andrea Leigh Fair
  • Role: Local counsel (common in Eastern District of Texas cases).
  • Firm & Office: Miller Fair Henry PLLC, Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Andrea Fair is a patent litigator with experience in the Eastern District of Texas.

Note: The information above is based on publicly available docket entries and general firm/attorney profiles. Specific roles (e.g., "lead counsel" vs. "counsel") are inferred based on typical litigation team structures and firm prominence.

The defendant in this patent infringement case, 2:25-cv-00898 in the Texas Eastern District Court, is CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.. Cisco is represented by the following counsel:

From Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP:

• Danielle Zapata Mills (Lead Counsel / Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Mills is a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group, focusing on patent litigation across various technologies, often in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Wendy Wenyu Cai (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, New York, New York.
  • Experience Note: Cai is an associate focusing on intellectual property litigation, including patent infringement cases.

• Brian Ashley Rosenthal (Lead Counsel / Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, New York, New York.
  • Experience Note: Rosenthal is a partner specializing in complex patent litigation, including trials in federal district courts and proceedings before the PTAB.

• Michelle Zhu (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Zhu is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group, with experience in patent litigation and other complex commercial disputes.

• Sung Bin Lee (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, New York, New York.
  • Experience Note: Lee is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group, focusing on patent litigation.

• Emily M Whitcher (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Whitcher is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group, with a focus on patent litigation.

From Potter Minton:

• Shaun William Hassett (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: Potter Minton, Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Hassett is a seasoned trial attorney with extensive experience in intellectual property litigation, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Michael E Jones (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: Potter Minton, Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Jones is a well-known local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas, frequently appearing in patent infringement cases.