Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al (Case No. 2:26-cv-00150), was filed in the Eastern District of Texas on February 23, 2026. The plaintiff, Cloud Byte LLC, is asserting U.S. Patent No. 9,560,177 against defendants Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE) and others. While the specific nature of Cloud Byte LLC (e.g., operating company, Non-Practicing Entity/Patent Assertion Entity) is not definitively clear from initial public information, its role as a plaintiff asserting patent rights against a major technology company often indicates a patent assertion strategy. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company is a global enterprise technology company providing servers, storage, networking, software, and financial services. The accused products, services, or technology are not explicitly detailed in the immediately available search results, but patent cases against large enterprise technology firms typically target specific hardware or software solutions they offer that allegedly implement the patented technology.

The sole patent at issue is US Patent No. 9,560,177. This patent, titled "System and method for cloud computing with enhanced virtual machine migration," generally relates to systems and methods for improving efficiency and performance in cloud computing environments, particularly concerning the migration of virtual machines between different hosts or storage systems.

The case is proceeding in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically significant for patent litigation due to its reputation as a "rocket docket" with a fast trial schedule and perceived plaintiff-friendly procedures, including a tendency to refuse to stay cases pending USPTO reexamination and to resist case transfers to other venues. The assigned judge is Rodney Gilstrap, known for presiding over a substantial number of patent cases. While the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision in 2017 initially restricted patent venue options, plaintiffs have adapted by sometimes targeting foreign affiliates to maintain venue in the Eastern District of Texas. Given the recent filing date, detailed specific notability beyond the venue choice and the parties involved is not yet widely reported. However, the involvement of a significant tech enterprise like HPE against a plaintiff asserting cloud computing patents could indicate broader implications for the cloud infrastructure industry if substantial rulings are made.

Patent Infringement Litigation: Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al.

Case Number: 2:26-cv-00150
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Patents at Issue: US Patent 9560177
Status: Active

This report details the key legal developments in the patent infringement case of Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, involving US Patent 9560177.

Key Legal Developments:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• Complaint Filed: Cloud Byte LLC initiated the lawsuit on February 23, 2026, by filing a complaint against Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al. in the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges infringement of US Patent 9560177. As of the current date, details regarding the defendants' answer or any counterclaims are not publicly available in the provided search results. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP is listed as counsel for some parties in the case.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance:
No information on motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay pending IPR has been identified in the provided search results as of May 21, 2026. Given the recent filing date of February 23, 2026, these types of motions may be filed as the case progresses.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:
The case is still in its early stages, and there is no information available regarding claim construction (Markman) proceedings or their outcomes.

4. Discovery Milestones:
No specific discovery milestones with strategic significance have been identified in the provided search results.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:
The case has not yet reached the trial stage, and therefore, there is no information available regarding trial events, verdicts, or post-trial motions.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:
The case is currently active. No information on settlement, dismissal, or judgment has been identified.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:
A search for Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings related to US Patent 9560177 on the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has not yielded any results in the provided information. IPRs and PGRs are administrative trial proceedings at the USPTO that challenge the patentability of issued patents, offering an alternative to district court litigation. If such proceedings were initiated, they could potentially impact the district court litigation, as a final decision by the PTAB on patentability can occur within one year of institution.

The following attorneys represent the plaintiff, Cloud Byte LLC, in Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al, case number 2:26-cv-00150, filed in the Texas Eastern District Court. All listed attorneys are from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP.

• Yury Kapgan (Counsel)
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA
  • Note: Yury Kapgan is a partner at Quinn Emanuel and focuses on intellectual property litigation, particularly patent infringement cases. His experience includes representing both plaintiffs and defendants in various technology sectors.
• Deepa Acharya (Counsel)
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Washington, D.C.
  • Note: Deepa Acharya is a partner at Quinn Emanuel with a practice concentrating on patent litigation across a broad range of technologies, including telecommunications, software, and medical devices.
• Ryan Seth Goldstein (Counsel)
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA
  • Note: Ryan Seth Goldstein is a partner at Quinn Emanuel specializing in complex intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement litigation, often involving technology and life sciences companies.
• Jonathan S. Tse (Counsel)
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, San Francisco, CA
  • Note: Jonathan Tse is a partner at Quinn Emanuel whose practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, particularly patent, trade secret, and copyright disputes in federal courts and before the ITC.
• Brian E. Mack (Counsel)
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, San Francisco, CA
  • Note: Brian Mack is a partner at Quinn Emanuel with significant experience in patent litigation, representing clients in various technology fields including software, telecommunications, and consumer electronics. The docket also shows a filing by Brian Mack on May 6, 2026.

Counsel Identified for Defendants in Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al.

In the patent infringement case Cloud Byte LLC v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al., filed in the Texas Eastern District Court under case number 2:26-cv-00150, the defendants Aruba Networks, LLC and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company are represented by attorneys from Haltom & Doan.

The counsel of record for the defendants include:

• Jennifer Haltom Doan

  • Role: Counsel for Defendants Aruba Networks, LLC and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
  • Firm: Haltom & Doan, located in Texarkana, Texas.
  • Note on experience: Jennifer Haltom Doan is a highly experienced trial attorney, particularly active in intellectual property and patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas. She is a founding partner of Haltom & Doan and has been involved in numerous high-stakes patent cases.

• Joshua Reed Thane

  • Role: Counsel for Defendants Aruba Networks, LLC and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.
  • Firm: Haltom & Doan, located in Texarkana, Texas.
  • Note on experience: Joshua Reed Thane is a partner at Haltom & Doan with a practice focusing on intellectual property litigation, including patent infringement defense, often appearing in the Eastern District of Texas.